Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Pat) 722

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
JITENDRA KUMAR, J.

Rajesh Kumar, Son Of Syamali Singh – Petitioner
Versus
Nutan Devi, Wife Of Rajesh Kumar, D/o. Bimaldeo Prasad Singh - Respondent
Criminal Revision No.1354 of 2019
Decided On : 18-02-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Jitendra Narain Sinha, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Rambabu Yadav, Adv.

Court upheld the wife's right to maintenance despite husband's claims of inability due to multiple dependents; established that restitution decree does not negate maintenance rights when valid reasons for separation exist.

Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 125 - Maintenance - Order for maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month modified to Rs. 9,500/- per month due to husband's income, need for adjustment considering additional dependents, with incremental provision of 5% per annum. (Paras 17-19)

(B) Maintenance Law - Wife's right to maintenance upheld notwithstanding husband's decree for restitution of conjugal rights; Court's consideration of valid grounds for wife's separation from husband emphasized. (Paras 14-15)

Facts of the case:
The marriage between the petitioner and respondent strained due to demands for dowry and resultant cruelty, leading the wife to seek maintenance after the husband contested her claims. The petitioner reported a salary of Rs. 30,000/- monthly.

Findings of Court:
The Court agreed to reduce maintenance payment amount to Rs. 9,500/- and ordered automatic annual increments of 5%.

Issues: The Court addressed whether the maintenance order was justifiable given the husband's financial responsibilities due to additional dependents.

Ratio Decidendi: The decree for restitution does not categorically disqualify the wife from receiving maintenance if valid reasons for separation exist; judicial opinion favors provision of maintenance rights under Section 125, contingent on individual case facts.

Result: Maintenance amount modified to Rs. 9,500/- per month, with incremental adjustments.

Table of Content
1. established facts of marriage and maintenance. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. arguments regarding maintenance amount and legality. (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 11)
3. court's analysis of maintenance rights and reasons. (Para 14 , 15)
4. maintenance determined considering multiple dependents. (Para 16 , 19)
5. final orders regarding maintenance modification and compliance. (Para 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT :

Jitendra Kumar, J.

The present Criminal Revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner-husband against the impugned order dated 26.04.2019, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sheikhpura in Maintenance Case No. 29M of 2017, whereby learned Family Court has directed the petitioner- husband to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month from the date of filing of the petition towards her maintenance.

2. The factual background of this case is that the marriage was solemnized between the petitioner/Rajesh Kumar and Opposite Party/Nutan Devi on 07.05.2009, as per Hindu rites and customs and subsequent to the marriage, the wife joined her husband in his matrimonial home. But soon thereafter, marriage started running into rough weather on account of additional demand of dowry and on account of non- fulfillment of the same, torturing of the O.P./wife by the husband.

3. It is further stated by wife in her maintenance petition that husband (petitioner herein) is in CRPF, drawing monthly salary of Rs. 50,000/- and she has no means of income and is unable to maintain herself.

4. It further transpires that on notice, the husband appeared in the maintenance proceeding and contested the maintenance petition filed by her wife. As per husband, just after seven days of marriage, the wife left the matrimonial home on her own without any sufficient reason. Subsequently, the husband filed one matrimonial petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights bearing Matrimonial Case No. 199 of 2016 and the same has been decreed ex-parte in favour of the husband. Subsequently, even ex-parte divorce has been also obtained by the husband against his wife.

5. After trial, learned Family Court found that the husband is a Constable in CRPF and getting monthly salary of Rs. 30,000/- and hence, directed the husband to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month to his wife towards her maintenance.

6. I heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Party.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eye of law. To substantiate his claim, he submits that as per finding of the Family Court, the monthly salary of the husband was Rs. 30,000/- and out of Rs. 30,000/- per month, Rs. 15,000/- has been directed to be paid to his wife towards maintenance. That is against all legal principles in regard to maintenance, admissible to wife. He further submits that besides the wife, even his parents are also dependent upon him.

8. He further submits that subsequent to the maintenance order, he has got ex-parte divorce against the wife and thereafter, no appeal has been preferred by the wife against the previous decree of restitution of conjugal rights or even decree of divorce passed on 13.06.2019 and the petitioner has entered into second marriage with another lady on 28.06.2020 and at present, even one daughter is born out of the wedlock with the second wife. Even second child is expected by the second wife within few months.

9. Hence, the impugned order directing the petitioner-husband to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month to his previous wife is neither maintainable in law, nor feasible in practice by the petitioner-husband.

10. However, learned counsel for the Opposite Party/wife defends the impugned order submitting that there is no illegality or infirmity in it. He further submits that decree of restitution of conjugal rights as well as divorce petition has been passed ex-parte without any knowledge of the wife/O.P. and no notice was served and hence, she was not aware.

11. He furth