A wife must demonstrate sufficient reason to refuse cohabitation with her husband to be entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.

ORDER :

1. The present criminal revision has been filed against the judgment dated 30.09.2003 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka in Crl. Misc. No. 70 of 2002 [T.R. No. 5 of 2003 (F.C.) whereby the application filed by the petitioner under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 was dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being legally wedded wife of the opposite party no. 2, had filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for issuance of direction upon the opposite party no. 2, who was in service of Border Security Force to pay her maintenance of Rs.3,000/- per month. The marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the opposite party no. 2 on 22nd April, 1986 in accordance with Hindu rites and rituals. After the marriage, the petitioner was brought to the house of the opposite party no. 2, but she was always subjected to torture by the opposite party no. 2 and his parents. She was harassed and assaulted as well as denied proper food and clothing. Therefore, she filed a case under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code against her in-laws and the husband (the opposite party no. 2) which was pending for disposal in a Court at Dumka. Further, on 04.09.2001, in absence of the opposite party no. 2, the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the petitioner forcibly ousted her from the matrimonial home alleging her a witch as she was incapable of bearing a child. Thereafter, the petitioner came to her father's home and since then she is living there and her husband or in-laws never came to take her back. The petitioner claimed that her father was a poor old man who had a big family to maintain and whose only source of income was some agricultural lands. As such, he was unable to maintain her. The petitioner had also no means to maintain herself. On 05.10.2002, the petitioner went to her in-laws house for demanding maintenance, but her in-laws refused to give anything to her.

3. The application of the petitioner filed under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. was registered as Crl. Misc. Case No. 70 of 2002 in which the opposite party no. 2 appeared and filed show cause stating that after solemnizing marriage with the petitioner in the year 1986, they were leading a good and happy conjugal life. In the year 1987, when the opposite party no. 2 was selected in B.S.F. as ‘Jawan’ the petitioner started compelling him to get separated from his old parents, however, the opposite party no. 2 pacified her by providing several valuable articles as well as purchasing some land in her name in the State of Bengal. Further, the opposite party no. 2 used to send money orders in the name of the petitioner for meeting the domestic expenses and for looking after his old parents, but she used to keep the entire money without informing her in-laws and used to spend the same as per her wish. The said fact came to knowledge of the opposite party no. 2 only when he arrived at his native place in vacation. It was further stated that the opposite party no. 2 had given enough movable and immovable property to the petitioner to lead a sound life and she was capable enough to maintain herself through the means provided by him. The criminal case for the offence under Section 498-A of the I.P.C. was said to have been filed by the petitioner to put pressure on the opposite party no. 2 with an intention to lead a separate life away from her in-laws whereas the opposite party no. 2 was adamant to live with his old parents. It was also stated that the land which was being possessed by the opposite party no. 2 was rocky and unproductive and his parents were fully dependent on his monthly salary.

4. In the said case, altogether six witnesses were examined on behalf of the petitioner. On the other hand, the opposite party no. 2 examined three witnesses on his behalf. Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka vide judgment dated 30.09.2003, dismissed the application of the petitioner filed under Section 125 of