A wife residing separately without sufficient cause is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125(4) Cr.P.C., even if the husband has a duty to maintain.

JUDGMENT :

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

The instant Cr. Revision has been preferred against the order dated 06.08.2022 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Ramgarh in Original Maintenance Case No.05 of 2019 whereby the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. of the petitioner has been rejected.

2. The brief facts leading to this Cr. Revision are that on behalf of petitioner-Chanchala Pandey (wife of Rajesh Kumar Pandey), Riyanshu Pandey and Ridhanshu Pandey (sons of Rajesh Kumar Pandey) the maintenance application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was moved before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ramgarh with these averments that the petitioner- Chanchala Pandey was married with Rajesh Kumar Pandey-Opp. Party No.2 according to Hindu rites and rituals on 19.04.2000 and out of the said wedlock, two sons were born, who are Riyanshu Pandey, 17 years old and Ridhanshu Pandey, 15 years old now. After few years of marriage, the petitioner was physically and mentally tortured. O.P. No.2 Rajesh Kumar Pandey is in C.C.L. Rajrappa Washery as a Dumber Operator. The Opposite Party No.2 began to eat non-veg and consume liquor and the major part of his salary was expended by him in all his luxuries. He has neither handed over his salary to the petitioner-Chanchala Pandey. Whenever she demanded, 100 rupee or 200 rupee was given by Opposite Party No.2. On account of his bad habits the Opposite Party No.2 has become extravagant. In the year 2017 the demand of dowry was made. The petitioner filed a case being Mahila Police Station Case No.30 of 2018 which was registered under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 read Section 34 of I.P.C. the same is pending now. The Opposite Party No.2 has also taken the loan from HDFC Bank against the pledge of jewellery in the name of the petitioner of which instalment is to be paid. The complaint was also made to the Superintendent of Police in regard to demand of Rs. 5,00,000/- by the Opposite Party No.2. The petitioner is residing in another house along with children and she is not being maintained by the Opposite Party No.2. The Opposite Party No.2 is getting 55,000/- rupees per month. He has agricultural land and house as well worth Rs. 50,00,000/-. In view of the above, prayed for the maintenance amount of Rs.25,000/- for herself and also for the children.

3. On behalf of Opposite Party-husband the show-cause reply was given on the ground that the responding Opposite Party never tortured the petitioner physically or mentally as alleged rather he kept her with love, affection and dignity. The Opposite Party is the Pump Operator in C.C.L. not as a Dumber operator. The responding Opposite Party has provided all the facilities as per his financial status to the petitioner. He did not obtain the loan and never pressurised to the complainant to repay the loan amount and never made demand of dowry as alleged in the year 2017. Whatever loan was taken, the instalment of the same is being paid by responding Opposite Party. The responding Opposite Party is getting 40,000/- rupees per month. He has no other landed property. He has been properly maintaining the petitioner-wife and both the children as well. The fee, educational requirement, cloths, medicine and accommodation everything is being provided by the responding Opposite Party to the children. Rest of the allegations as made in the Maintenance Application are denied by the responding Opposite Party.

4. On behalf of petitioner in oral evidence examined P.W.1 Chanchala Pandey P.W.2 Ridhanshu Pandey, P.W.3 Vyas Upadhaya.

5. In documentary evidence, the petitioner adduced Ext.1 certified copy of the F.I.R. of Ramgarh (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 30 of 2018, Ext. 2 certified copy of chare-sheet of Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 30 of 2018, Ext. 3 salary slip of Opposite Party for the month of October, 2021

6. On behalf of Opposite Party in oral evidence examined OPW.1-Rajesh Kumar Pandey, OPW 2 Ali Ahmad.

7. In documentary evidence filed Ext. A the online computer copy of Register-II i