Ravi Nath Verma, J. - (1.) The petitioner has questioned the legality of the order dated 20.9.2014 rendered by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad in M.P. Case No. 345 of 2009 whereby and whereunder the petition filed by the opposite party No. 2 for grant of maintenance under Sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code") has been allowed and direction has been given to the petitioner to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 5,000/ - to the opposite party No. 2 and Rs. 1,500/ - per month to each of minor child being a total of Rs. 9,500/ - Filtering out the unnecessary details, the facts leading to filing of this revision application, are that the opposite No. 2 is the legally wedded wife of this petitioner and their marriage was solemnized in the year 2005 but even before the marriage due to their close intimacy, the opposite party No. 2 became pregnant, only thereafter the marriage was solemnized. After marriage, both the parties started living in a rented house. It was agreed and settled between the family of both the parties that the father of opposite party No. 2 would pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/ - per month to the father of this petitioner towards the expenses of marriage and the said amount was paid till 6.3.2006. Out of the said wedlock, the opposite party No. 2 gave birth to twin babies i.e. one son and one daughter in June, 2005 whereafter the opposite part No. 2 was taken to her matrimonial house in the month of July, 2006. In spite of having executed all the household works, she was physically and mentally tortured due to non -payment of any dowry during the marriage. Even she was brutally assaulted by her husband when she objected of his late night return to the house. She again gave birth to a female child on 26th June, 2007. It is also alleged that her husband and mother -in -law always used to blame her for non -fulfillment of demand of dowry and they had snatched all her 'stridhan' including ornaments and other costly belongings. In the month of August, 2008, she was driven out of her matrimonial house along with minor children. The opposite party No. 2 being a helpless lady took a house on rent in Chiragora and her father used to give some financial help but the life of opposite party No. 2 became miserable. She anyhow arranged a temporary job for her with poor salary but as she was unable to maintain herself and her minor children, the petition for grant of maintenance was filed as her husband has got sufficient means to maintain her and minor children.
(2.) After notice, the present petitioner appeared before the court below and filed his show -cause and raised finger on opposite party No. 2 being a lady of questionable character and earlier one person had committed suicide due to his love affairs. It was also stated in the show -cause that the present petitioner has filed a case under Sec. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of his conjugal right but as the opposite party No. 2 is living in adultery, she is not entitled to any maintenance in view of sub -section (4) of Sec. 125 of the Code.
(3.) Learned Principal Judge, Family Court after considering the pleadings of the parties and the evidences including the documents produced in court, allowed the prayer of opposite party No. 2 and directed the petitioner to pay the monthly maintenance as indicated above. Hence, this revision.;