KAVITA Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
LAWS(UTN)-2013-10-43
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND (AT: NAINITAL)
Decided on October 30,2013

KAVITA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARAKHAND Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) An application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance allowance was filed on behalf of Smt. Kavita and her minor son Master Nikunj against Vijay Kumar Dhiman, husband of Kavita and father of Master Nikunj. Vijay Kumar Dhiman contested the application and filed written statement. PW-1 Smt. Kavita and PW-2 Mithilesh Kumar were examined on behalf of the wife. DW1 Vijay Kumar Dhiman and DW2 Raj Kumar were examined on behalf of husband. Documents were also filed by the rival parties. After considering the pleas and the evidence thus brought on record, learned Judge, Family Court, Haridwar partly allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. It was held by the court below, vide order dated 22.05.2008, that the wife refused to live with her husband without any sufficient reason. The application filed on her behalf was, therefore, dismissed. The father was, however, directed to pay monthly maintenance allowance of Rs. 1,000/- to his son (applicant no. 2) on the 10th day of every calendar month. Aggrieved against the same, present criminal revision was preferred by Smt. Kavita.
(2.) The main plank of dismissing the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. of Smt. Kavita by the court below was that she refused to live with her husband Vijay Kumar Dhiman without any sufficient reason.
(3.) It appears on the basis of evidence brought on record that the applicant-wife was unable to maintain herself and her husband is having sufficient means. But the vital question is whether the husband neglected or refused to maintain his wife? The reply to the aforesaid question becomes inconsequential if this fact is brought on record that the wife refused to live with her husband without any sufficient reason. It will be useful to reproduce sub-Section (4) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. for ready reference. The same reads as under: "(4) No wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance for the maintenance or the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be, from her husband under this section if she is living in adultery, or if, without any sufficient reason, she refused to live with her husband, or if they are living separately by mutual consent.";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.