LAWS(GJH)-2011-7-295

DHIMANT PRAVINCHANDRA SHAH Vs. SONAL DHIMANTBHAI SHAH 2 ORS

Decided On July 14, 2011
Dhimant Pravinchandra Shah Appellant
V/S
Sonal Dhimantbhai Shah 2 Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present Revision Application, under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the Petitioner - husband challenging the impugned judgment and order dated 24/2/2011 passed by the learned Family Court No. 4, Ahmedabad in Criminal misc. Application No. 1384 of 2008, by which the learned Judge has directed the Petitioner - husband to pay a sum of Rs. 6000/ - per month to the Respondent No. 1 wife and Rs. 2000 per month to the Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 each - two minor children, by way of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) MR . N.D. Buch, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner - husband has assailed the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court on the two grounds, namely (1) at the time of marriage between the Petitioner - husband and Respondent No. 1 - wife, the earlier marriage of the Respondent No. 1 wife with her earlier husband was in subsistence and therefore, the marriage between the Petitioner - husband and the Respondent No. 1 wife is null and void and; (2) the learned Judge has materially erred in awarding in all Rs. 10,000/ - per month, towards maintenance, in absence of any material on record with respect to the income of the Petitioner - husband.

(3.) MR . Buch, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has submitted that the marriage between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 wife was solemnized on 11/8/2000 and divorce between the Respondent No. 1 wife and her earlier husband was subsequent to the marriage between Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 and therefore, the marriage between Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 is nullity and therefore, she is not entitled to maintenance from the Petitioner under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Mr. Buch, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioner has relied upon the following decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court as well as this Court, in support of his above submissions: