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.

JUDGMENT :

Sumeet Goel, J.

1. Challenge in the present petition is made to the order dated 21.12.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court at Gurdaspur, in Case bearing CIS No. MNT 266/2019, Case No.08 of 27.02.2017. Vide the impugned order the Family Court allowed the petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, filed by the respondent.

2. In order to ward off any ambiguity qua the status of parties in the proceedings, the parties are being addressed by status of the petitioner and respondent, respectively, in the present criminal revision petition.

3. The marriage of petitioner was performed with the respondent on 06.02.2013. The parties are stated to have lived and co habited together at Pathankot and Delhi after their marriage. However, no issue was born out of the wedlock of the parties. Differences having arisen between the parties, the respondent (wife) filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of maintenance against the petitioner (husband).

4. The Family Court while deciding the maintenance petition held that the respondent though is well qualified having studied B.Tech., but is not doing any work. It finds mention in the impugned order that the respondent left her job so as to give time to the petitioner and to perform her matrimonial obligations. The petitioner is also a B.Tech. Engineer, and is working as a software engineer in a reputed company at Delhi. Relying upon the Income Tax Return of the petitioner (husband) the Family Court held that his annual income is Rs.27 lacs, monthly income being Rs.2,25,000/- approximately. Accordingly, the Family Court granted an amount of Rs.70,000/- as maintenance to the respondent. The same is challenged in the present criminal revision petition by the petitioner.

5. It is pertinent that while issuing notice of motion in the present criminal revision petition this Court vide order dated 14.02.2020 directed the petitioner to continue to make the payment of maintenance @ Rs.45,000/- per month and on his doing so, the payment of balance amount of maintenance under the impugned order was stayed.

6. On account of non-payment of the arrears of maintenance by the petitioner, the Family Court, subsequently vide order dated 09.11.2020 directed the employer of the petitioner to deduct the half Salary of the petitioner and to send the same to the Family Court. Further, conditional warrant of arrest of the petitioner for payment of amount of Rs.15,00,000/- towards maintenance was issued by the Family Court.

7. The petitioner is stated to have challenged the order dated 09.11.2020 before this Court by filing case bearing No. CRM-M 361 of 2021. The petitioner is stated to have made certain payment of partial amount of maintenance during the pendency of said petition before this Court. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the petitioner had not complied with the direction of this Court in the present proceedings vide order dated 14.02.2020. The case bearing CRM-M 361 of 2021 filed by the petitioner before this Court was ultimately dismissed as withdrawn by the petitioner on 21.12.2021.

8. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order dated 21.12.2019 is not sustainable, as the Family court has not considered the defence of the petitioner as stated in his reply to the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., as well as in the cross-examination of the respondent. It is argued that the respondent is not entitled to seek maintenance as she has willfully deserted the company of the petitioner without any reasonable cause. It is further argued that the Family Court has erred in holding the annual income of the petitioner as Rs.27.00 lacs per annum. Whereas, the petitioner’s income after payment of tax was Rs.25,52,220/- per annum. It is further submitted that the petitioner was paying rent of Rs.32,000/- per month and Rs.25,000/- per month to his aged mother and these amounts were to be set off from the income of the petitioner whil