KRISHNA BAHUGUNA Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL
LAWS(UTN)-2013-6-139
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on June 13,2013

Krishna Bahuguna Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF UTTARANCHAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) An application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for award of maintenance was moved by Sachin and others (children and wife of Ghananand Bahuguna) against him (Ghananand). The proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was pending before the learned Judge, Family Court, Pauri Garhwal. An application for interim maintenance was filed on behalf of the applicants (sons and wife of the opposite party). Learned Judge, Family Court awarded the interim maintenance of Rs. 4000/- to the applicants. Learned Judge, Family Court relied upon the affidavit filed by Smt. Krishna Bahuguna, wherein it was deposed that the monthly income of opposite party (Ghananand) was Rs. 12,000/-.
(2.) When the opposite party brought to the notice of learned Judge, that his income was Rs. 5,186/- per month and not Rs. 12,000/- per month, a show cause notice was directed to be issued to Krishna Bahuguna as to why not a complaint be moved against her for giving false evidence. Smt. Krishna appeared before the learned Judge. She said that she indicated the said fact in her affidavit on the basis of what was told to her by her husband. Her husband told the applicant wife that he was serving as Supervisor in PWD and was earning Rs. 12,000/- per month. Thus it was a case of an affidavit vs. written statement. While Krishna Bahuguna indicated in her affidavit that monthly income of the opposite party was Rs. 12,000/- per month, her husband averred in the written statement that his income was Rs. 5186/- per month. The learned Judge passed the impugned order only after the disposal of application for an ad-interim application for maintenance.
(3.) The application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was still pending adjudication of the Court below. It was not within the competence of the Court below to have passed the impugned order, in as much as, the dispute between the parties was not finally decided. The matter under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was still under adjudication. Only the application for grant of an ad-interim maintenance was decided, that too, on the basis of the affidavit of the applicant Smt. Krishna Bahuguna, on the one hand, and the written statement filed by Ghananand Bahuguna, on the other hand.;


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