SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
Bhushan Kumar Meen - Appellant
Versus
Mansi Meen Allas Harpreet Kaur – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 879 of 2009 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 7503 of 2008) with SLP (Cri.) No. 7924 of 2008
Decided On : 28-04-2009
Criminal Procedure Code, Sections, 125 and 482- Quashing of the order of interim maintenance- The High Court refused to quash the order of interim maintenance of Rs 10.000/ per month to wife-Contention that out of salary of Rs. 34,900/- various deductions were being made, including a deduction of Rs. 21,329/- towards the home loan and he got only Rs. 9000/- per month- Held the maintenance was on higher side- Moreover the respondent was well qualified and capable to maintain herself in the future- Therefore amount reduced to Rs. 5000/ per month- Arrears of maintenance to be calculated by Magistrate and to be paid by appellant with in three months in three installments. ( paras 6 to 9)
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized:
The appeal was against an order of interim maintenance granted to the respondent-wife, which was initially set at Rs. 10,000 per month (!) (!) .
The appellant-husband demonstrated that his net take-home salary was approximately Rs. 9,000 after deductions, including Rs. 21,329 towards a home loan from a gross salary of Rs. 34,900 [1000696250002].
The appellant contended that the amount of Rs. 10,000 was excessive and argued that the respondent-wife's ability to maintain herself should be considered, given her qualifications [1000696250003].
The respondent-wife argued that the maintenance amount was justified based on the appellant's net salary and that her lack of employment did not warrant reduction, considering her qualifications and potential to support herself in the future [1000696250004].
The Court found the maintenance amount to be on the higher side, given the appellant's actual income, but acknowledged that the respondent-wife was not employed at present and had the capacity to maintain herself in the future. Consequently, the Court reduced the interim maintenance from Rs. 10,000 to Rs. 5,000 per month [1000696250005].
The Court directed the recalculation of arrears based on the modified maintenance amount and stipulated that the appellant must pay these arrears within three months, possibly in three installments [1000696250006].
The Court clarified that this reduction was an interim measure and did not determine the final maintenance amount, leaving the matter open for final adjudication by the Magistrate. The Court also did not decide on the applicability of Section 125 Cr.P.C. regarding the respondent-wife [1000696250007].
The Court emphasized the importance of expeditious disposal of the pending proceedings, directing the Magistrate to conclude the matter within six months from the communication of the order [1000696250008].
The other pending Special Leave Petition was to be listed separately for final disposal, and the stay on the attachment of the appellant's salary would continue until the final determination by the Magistrate. The appellant was warned that default in payment could lead to re-imposition of attachment [1000696250009] (!) .
The appeal was partly allowed, resulting in the reduction of the interim maintenance amount while maintaining other conditions as set by the Magistrate (!) .
Please let me know if you need further analysis or specific legal advice regarding this case.
ORDER :
Altamas Kabir, Cyriac Joseph, JJ.
Leave is granted in SLP(C) No. 7503 of 2008.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 1st July, 2008, passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Crl. Misc. No. 14793-M of 2008, whereby the appellant's application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the orders dated 25th July, 2007 and 6th November, 2007 passed by the courts below granting Rs. 10,000/- per month, as interim maintenance to the respondent-wife, was dismissed.
2. Taking into consideration the evidence adduced, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala, before whom the proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, filed by the respondent-wife is pending, directed the appellant-husband to pay the said sum of Rs. 10,000/- by way of interim maintenance to the respondent-wife during the pendency of the proceeding. The said order was affirmed both by the Sessions Court as well as the High Court.
3. Before us, the appellant-husband, who is appearing in person, has shown that his salary certificate had been produced before the Magistrate, from which it appears that he was drawing approximately Rs. 34,900/- per month towards his salary, out of which various deductions were being made, including a deduction of Rs. 21,329/- towards the home loan which he had obtained, leaving in his hand as takeaway salary a sum of about Rs. 9000/-.
4. The appellant has submitted that in that view of the matter, the amount as awarded by the Magistrate to the respondent-wife was not justifiable. The appellant-husband has also taken another point regarding the maintainability of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. on account of the ability of the respondent-wife to maintain herself.
5. On behalf of the respondent-wife, it has been urged that having regard to the net salary, which the appellant is entitled to take home, the amount as assessed by way of interim maintenance by the Magistrate and as upheld by the Sessions Judge as well as the High Court, could not be said to be excessive and that the fact that the appellant had taken the home loan which has been adjusted against the salary, is no consideration for altering the said amount, as had been granted by the learned Sessions Judge. As far as the second point taken by the appellant is concerned, it was submitted that the same required evidence and had to be to ultimately decided by the Magistrate while deciding the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C..
6. Having heard learned Counsel for the respective parties, and considering the reality of the situation to the effect that the appellant is receiving a sum of about Rs. 9000/- in hand after deduction of various amounts, including the installments towards repayment of the home loan, we are of the view that the amount as awarded by way of interim maintenance is on the high side. At the same time, we cannot also shut our eyes to the fact that at present the respondent-wife is not employed or at least there is nothing on record to indicate she is employed in any gainful work. However, having regard to the qualifications that she possesses, there is no reason why she ought not to be in a position to also maintain herself in the future. Accordingly, we modify the order passed by the learned Magistrate, granting Rs. 10,000/- per month to the respondent-wife by way of interim maintenance and direct that the appellant-husband shall pay to the respondent-wife a sum of Rs. 5000/- per month, instead of Rs. 10,000/-, and all other terms and conditions, as indicated by the learned Magistrate, will continue to operate.
7. We are informed that there are huge arrears, which are yet to be paid by the appellant-husband to the respondent-wife. The learned Magistrate shall recalculate the amount of arrears on the basis of the order passed today and the appellant- husband shall within three months of the re-assessment of the amount, pay the sum to the respondent-wife, if necessary, in three i
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.