A party may withdraw consent for mutual divorce at any time before the decree, affecting maintenance claims.

JUDGMENT, J.

SANDEEP KUMAR, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 4.

2. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 27.06.2019 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Madhubani, in M.R. Case No.82 of 2015, whereby and whereunder the Principal Judge has allowed the petition filed by the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.3,500/- per month to the opposite party no.2 (wife) as maintenance.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that the marriage between petitioner and opposite party no.2 was solemnized according to Hindu rites and rituals on 27.02.2009 and they were blessed with a son and a daughter. The opposite party no.2 filed Mahila P.S. Case No. 15 of 2015 under sections 341, 327, 498(A), 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against her husband (petitioner) and his family members on the allegation that on 30.10.2014 her in laws ousted the opposite party no.2 from her Sasural after assaulting and snatching her belongings. Subsequently, M.R. Case No. 82 of 2015 was filed by the opposite party no. 2 against the petitioner on 01.04.2015 and in the said case the petitioner appeared and filed his written statement on 23.03.2017.

4. It is also the case of the petitioner that on 25.07.2017 the petitioner and opposite party no.2 with their consent filed M.M. Case No. 176 of 2017 for divorce under section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act. As per their joint petition for mutual divorce, the petitioner had agreed to pay Rs.1,31,000/, out of which, Rs. 65,500/- was paid on the first motion and remaining amount was to be paid at the time of second motion. It was also agreed that the aforesaid amount would be one-time permanent alimony and the opposite party no.2 will not claim anything thereafter and on the same day, the opposite party no.2 was examined as witness.

5. It is also the case of the petitioner that it was also agreed between the parties that they would get the criminal proceedings disposed by compromise and the opposite party no.2 would withdraw M.R. Case No.82 of 2015. However, the opposite party no.2 after receiving the amount of Rs. 65,500/- in the first motion did not appear in the aforementioned M.M. Case and vide order dated 02.03.2021 the petitioner was directed to deposit rest amount of the permanent alimony of Rs. 65,500/- to the opposite party no. 2, therefore, in compliance of the order dated 02.03.2021 the petitioner deposited the demand draft of Rs.65,500/- on 25.03.2021. Thereafter, the opposite party no.2 filed an application withdrawing her consent from the mutual divorce joint petition and whereafter, the impugned order has been passed by the Principal Judge.

6. It is also the case of the petitioner that the learned Principal Judge has failed to appreciate the fact that on the first motion the opposite party no.2 received the amount of Rs. 65,500/- and thereafter she filed a petition for withdrawal of her consent. He has also ignored the fact that the petitioner is a cook and his income is only Rs.5,000/- per month and the petitioner and opposite party no. 2 with their mutual consent had filed a M.Μ. Case No.176 of 2017 and as per terms of the said joint petition the opposite party no. 2 had received Rs. 65,500/- at the time of the first motion.

7. The submission of the petitioner is that once opposite party no.2 has agreed and in pursuance thereof, both the parties have filed joint petition for divorce with mutual consent