The duty of a husband to maintain his wife under Section 125 of the CrPC prevails, and willingness to take back the wife should be proven through legal procedures.

JUDGMENT

Maheshan Nagaprasanna, J. - The petitioner is before this Court calling in question order dated 11-07-2022 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 625 of 2021 pending before the IV Additional Principal family Judge, Mysore in an application filed under Section 125(1) of the Cr.P.C.

2. Heard Sri M. Vikas, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri D.J. Govindaraju, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

3. Brief facts that lead the petitioner to this Court in the subject petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:-

The petitioner aged 66 years old and the respondent aged 60 years old got married on 13-03-2020 when they were 64 and 58 years old respectively. The averments in the petition are that the petitioner was wanting a companion and the respondent, a divorcee was also wanting a companionship and accordingly by mutual consent got married. On 29-04-2020 the innings of the couple began and on 29-05-2020 the respondent deserted the petitioner and leaves the matrimonial home. After leaving the matrimonial home after staying for one month, the respondent institutes two proceedings-one seeking divorce from the hands of the petitioner and the other under Section 125 of the CrPC seeking maintenance. It appears that the petition seeking divorce in M.C. No. 424 of 2021 was withdrawn by the complainant. The criminal miscellaneous petition so filed seeking maintenance is considered on a application filed under Section 125 of the CrPC and an order is passed directing payment of interim maintenance of Rs. 7,000/-per month from the date of the application till disposal of the petition. The petitioner challenges the said order before this Court in the subject petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that interim maintenance is to be paid to a wife who has been neglected and deserted by the husband, but even as on date the petitioner is ready and willing to welcome the respondent back and lead a happy married life as both of them got married only for companionship and would submit that despite these submissions interim maintenance is granted by the trial Court and the divorce case filed is also withdrawn by the respondent.

5. On the other hand, the respondent would refute the submissions to contend that though she stayed for a month with the petitioner it becomes impossible for her to live with him as he was constantly harassing the respondent/wife and therefore, a notice was caused upon the petitioner prior to registration of the claim for divorce which was also replied to by the petitioner. The affidavit on assets and liabilities of the respondent is also filed before the concerned Court as is necessary in law. Therefore, the counsel for the respondent would submit that the subject petition be dismissed and interim maintenance so awarded be confirmed.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and perused the material on record.

7. The factum of marriage between the petitioner and the respondent on 13-03-2020 is not in dispute and the wife/ respondent begins to live with the petitioner on 29-04-2020 and leaves the matrimonial house a month thereafter is also not in dispute. The allegation of the wife is constant torture from the hands of the husband and therefore she has left the house. Both the proceedings are instituted by the wife against the petitioner-one seeking divorce in M.C. No. 424 of 2021 and the other seeking maintenance in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 625 of 2021. The divorce petition being withdrawn by the wife is of no avail as the wife is still in the matrimonial fold with the husband. So long as the respondent remains a legally wedded wife of the petitioner and the fact that she has been deserted by the husband, interim maintenance is a matter of right to the wife.

8. The order of the trial Court on an application filed by the wife under Section 125(1) CrPC cannot be taken exception merely because the petitioner