IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
S.S.SHINDE,J
Manglabai w/o Chhotulal Gaikwad - Applicant
Versus
Chhotulal s/o Kashiram Gaikwad - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2342/2007
Decided on : 01/04/2009
1. On 7.7.2004 the applicant filed Criminal Misc. Application No.96/2004 before the Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Nandurbar praying therein maintenance of Rs.1500/- per month from the respondent, for herself and three children. Her marriage was solemnized about eight years prior and still it is subsisting. They have two daughters and one son.
2. It is the case of the applicant that for seven years after her marriage she was treated well in the family. When the petitioner was pregnant, about one year before the date of application, she was not keeping good health. During sickness, she delivered the youngest daughter Manisha at the house of the respondent. She was badly in need of medical treatment, however, respondent neglected and did not provide proper medical treatment. She informed this to her parents and her parents visited her and also requested the respondent to provide proper medical treatment. The respondent, however, dropped the petitioner at her parents house where she had to reside since she was not in good health. The respondent kept with him the youngest daughter Manisha and told the applicant that she should come back after recovers from her ailment. The applicant on next day sent her brother to the house of the respondent to fetch daughter Manisha, however, the respondent did not send the daughter Manisha to the applicant’s brother. About after 20 to 22 days when the applicant recovered from her ailment she along with her parents and the panch of the village went to the house of the respondent with a request that she should resume cohabitation with the applicant. The respondent refused and drove away the applicant from his house and warned that the applicant should not enter his house again otherwise he would kill her.
3. It is further case of the applicant that the applicant on two more occasions after a gap of fifteen days attempted to convince the respondent to resume cohabitation and join his company was made. However, said attempt was not materialised in view of the respondent’s behaviour. The applicant was forced to reside with her parents on 27.6.2004, when the applicant had been to the house of respondent to fetch her younger daughter Manisha, the respondent abused and assaulted her by fist blows and drove her out of his house and said that he would not allow the applicant to meet their daughter.
4. It is the case of the applicant that the applicant is not earning anything and she is unable to maintain herself. The respondent is an agriculturist and has 10 to 15 acres of ancestral agricultural land and has about Rs.40 to 50 thousand income per year from the said land. The respondent is also working as a mason and earns daily wages of Rs.200/- and, therefore, has sufficient means to provide maintenance to the applicant. Thus, applicant claimed for grant of monthly maintenance of Rs.1500/- from the respondent and a cost of Rs.1500/- of the application.
5. On 19.11.2005 J.M.F.C. upon consideration of oral and documentary evidence, found that the petitioner is entitled and granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/- p.m. from the date of application.
6. The respondent filed Criminal Revision Application No.28/2005 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Nandurbar. The present applicant being dissatisfied with the quantum of maintenance preferred Criminal Revision No.3/2006 for enhancement of maintenance from Rs.500/- per month to Rs.1500/- per month from the date of application.
7. On 14.3.2007 both the revision applications arising out of the judgment and order dated 19.11.2005 passed by the J.M.F.C.Nandurbar and the Additional Sessions Judge, Nandurbar were decided by common judgment and order in Criminal Revision No.28/2005. The revisional Court set aside the judgment and order of the J.M.F.C. dated 19.11.2005. The learned Judge also dismissed the criminal revision filed by the applicant. Hence this application.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the impugned judgment
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.