Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN
Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, S/o. Shri Om Prakash – Appellant
Versus
Seema, W/o. Mukesh Kumar Agarwal – Respondent
ORDER :
ASHOK KUMAR JAIN, J.
1. Instant S.B. Criminal Revision Petition is preferred by Mukesh Kumar Agarwal, aggrieved from order dated 04-09-2019 in Criminal Misc. Case No. 37/2016, titled as “ Smt. Seema and Anr. v. Mukesh Kumar Agarwal ”, under Section 125 of CrPC for maintenance, passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 1, Jaipur.
2. By impugned order under Section 125 of CrPC, learned Family Court has directed present petitioner Mukesh Kumar to pay Rs. 10,000 per month to Respondent–Applicant No. 1 Seema and Rs. 5,000 per month to Respondent–Applicant No. 2 Manan Gupta, (minor son) totalling Rs. 15,000 per month from 27-01-2016 (filing of application), as maintenance.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner, while placing reliance upon grounds of revision petition, submitted that the petitioner solemnized marriage with Respondent No. 1 on 29-04-2004 and out of wedlock, Respondent No. 1 gave birth to a male child, (Master Manan), on 18-01-2006. He further submitted that Respondent No. 1, dissatisfied due to her own issues, has voluntarily left the matrimonial home and started to live separately from the petitioner. He further submitted that the petitioner has tried to pacify the
Maintenance under Section 125 of CrPC is legally mandated for dependents, requiring examination of needs versus financial capability of the obligor.
The husband has a statutory duty to maintain his wife and child under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and claims of insufficient income must be substantiated with credible evidence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for the wife and minor child, and the court's discretion to enhance the maintenance base....
(1) Maintenance – Even if wife is earning, it cannot operate as a bar from being awarded maintenance by husband – It is moral duty of husband to pay maintenance to her wife but it does not mean to sq....
The court reaffirmed that an able-bodied husband has a legal duty to maintain his wife and children, and maintenance should be based on actual income capacity.
The right to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. cannot be denied based on a wife's qualifications or potential earnings, especially when she has sacrificed her career for matrimonial duties.
The court affirmed that a spouse's educational qualifications do not disqualify them from receiving maintenance, emphasizing the need for a fair assessment of financial needs and obligations.
The duty of the husband to maintain his wife and the criteria for determining the quantum of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
The court ruled that maintenance must reflect the full financial capacity of the respondent, ensuring adequate support for the petitioner and minor child, and should be awarded from the date of filin....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
