SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
P.S. Rana, J.
Smt. Lata Devi and Anr. —Petitioners
versus
Sh. Madan Lal —Non-Petitioner
Cr. MMO No.236 of 2014
Decided on 17.8.2016

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:B.S. Attri, Advocate
For the Non-Petitioner:O.P. Chauhan, Advocate

Headnote:Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 125 – A summary proceeding – Maintenance includes (1) Food expenses (2) Clothing expenses (3) Medical expenses (4) Education expenses (5) Residential accommodation expenses – Wife and children legally entitled to maintenance allowance to the extent of ?rd of income of the husband – Non petitioner husband drawing salary of 18564 – Maintenance enhanced to 6000 pm. (Para 8, 9, 10)

       AIR 1999 S.C. 3348 – Relied upon

       Result: Petition disposed of.

ORDER

P.S. Rana, J.—Present petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 read with Article 227 of Constitution of India against order dated 10.9.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Court No. 5 Shimla in maintenance case No. 13-4 of 2013 title Smt. Lata Devi and another v. Madan Lal.

Brief facts of the case:

2. Smt. Lata Devi wife of Sh Madan Lal and minor son Suraj aged seven years filed petition under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for grant of maintenance allowance. It is pleaded that Smt. Lata Devi is legally wedded wife of Sh Madan Lal and he is presently posted as peon cum chowkidar in Government high school Chenog Tehsil and District Shimla. It is further pleaded that marriage of Lata Devi was solemnized on 10.7.2005 and out of wedlock one son namely Master Suraj aged seven years born. It is further pleaded that Sh Madan Lal was appointed as peon cum chowkidar fifteen years back and he is drawing salary of more than Rs.17000/- (Seventeen thousand) per month. It is further pleaded that for the last one year Sh Madan Lal has left his house and has started living with his sister and brother in law at village Satrol post office Mamleegh Tehsil Kandaghat District Solan HP. It is further pleaded that Sh Madan Lal is not providing any maintenance allowance to Smt Lata Devi and minor son Suraj. It is further pleaded that Sh Madan Lal has neglected Smt. Lata Devi and minor son Suraj. It is further pleaded that Sh Madan Lal has Rs.400000/- (Four lacs) in his general provident fund (GPF) account. It is further pleaded that Smt. Lata Devi and her son Suraj are entitled for maintenance allowance to the tune of Rs.6000/- (Six thousand) per month. Prayer for acceptance of petition filed under Section 125 Cr.PC sought.

3. Per contra response filed on behalf of Sh. Madan Lal pleaded therein that petition is not maintainable and petitioners have not come to court with clean hands and they have suppressed material facts. It is further pleaded that present petition filed just to harass non-petitioner. It is admitted that Madan Lal is Government servant and is posted as peon cum chowkidar in Government High School Chenog Tehsil and District Shimla. It is further pleaded that Madan Lal is handicapped person and has permanent disability to the extent of 60%. It is further pleaded that Madan Lal is also supporting his mother namely Kalawati aged 90 years. It is further pleaded that Madan Lal did not beat Smt. Lata Devi at any point of time because he is disabled person. Prayer for dismissal of maintenance petition sought.

4. Smt. Lata Devi has filed rejoinder and reasserted the allegations mentioned in the petition. Smt. Lata Devi and Suraj also filed application for grant of interim maintenance during pendency of application filed under section 125 Cr.PC. learned Trial Court granted maintenance allowance to Smt. Lata Devi and minor son Suraj to the tune of Rs.1500/- (One thousand five hundred) per month from the date of filing of petition.

5. Feeling aggrieved against inadequate grant of maintenance allowance present petition is filed by wife and minor son.

6. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners and learned Advocate appearing on behalf of non petitioner and also perused the record carefully.

7. Following points arise for determination in the present petition.

(1) Whether petition filed under Section 482 Cr. PC read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of petition?.

(2) Final Order.

Findings upon point No. 1 with reasons.

8. Submission of learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners that adequate interim compensation not granted by learned Judicial Magistrate in view of the fact that gross pay of non petitioner is Rs.18564/- (Eighteen thousand five hundred sixty four) as per document annexure P5 placed on record is accepted for reasons hereinafter mentioned. It is well settled law








Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top