IMPORTANT POINT
Grant of maintenance to wife and minor daughter – Mere capacity of wife to earn something or her qualification would not be reason for denying maintenance to wife.

ORDER (ORAL)

The destituted lady for herself and her minor daughter preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.1003 of 2016 before the learned Family Court, Rajkot under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. After battle, she could get relief in February, 2023 by way of the impugned judgment and order. The husband instead of satisfying the impugned judgment and order assailed it by way of the revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C.

2. In nutshell, the facts of the present case are stated as under.

2.1 The marriage of the petitioner and the respondent wife was solemnized on 29.04.2004 at Rajkot as per the Hindu rites and rituals. During the wed-lock, the parties have one daughter namely respondent No.2. After passage of some time, quarrel took place between the petitioner and the respondent wife. In the year 2016, the respondent wife left the house of the petitioner. On 20.10.2016, the respondent wife filed Criminal Misc. Application No.1003 of 2016 before the learned Family Court seeking maintenance and on 14.02.2023, the learned Family Court vide impugned judgment and order directed the petitioner to pay Rs.40,000/- as maintenance towards the respondent wife and her daughter. Hence, the present revision is filed.

3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

4. Ms. Acharya, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner husband raised multiple grounds to assail the impugned judgment and order. She firstly submits that in view of the earlier order dated 23.08.2023, she has filed (i) statement of payment made towards the maintenance; (ii) details of the income, assets, liabilities etc. submitted before the Court below and (iii) particulars of pending proceedings or order qua maintenance under another enactment. She would further submit that the income of the petitioner husband is less than the amount of the maintenance granted by the learned Family Court. She would further submit that the learned Family Court has not considered the salary slip of the husband which indicates that he was getting Rs.23,600/- per month. She would further submit that the learned Family Court has also ignored the aspect that the wife is highly qualified and she was serving at Jaipur University in the capacity of Manager. She would further submit that the wife was capable of earning and to maintain herself but the sole aspect has not been considered by the learned Family Court although sufficient evidence was produced. Thus, it is submitted that the learned Family Court has committed serious and gross error in granting the maintenance to the wife. It is also submitted that wife has withdrawn herself from the conjugal relationship and therefore, she is not entitled to get the maintenance in view of Section 125(4) of Cr.P.C.

5. It is also submitted that the learned Family Court has ignored the evidence of witness Yogeshkumar Babulal Saini at Exhibit-179 which unfolds that the wife was working as Secretary to one Kamla Poddar, Chairman of Poddar Enterprise. Learned advocate Ms.Acharya would further submit that the impugned order is passed in ignorance of various documentary evidence on record particularly Exhibit-182 to 184, also Exhibit-132 to 137, 66 to 82 and also 85 to 87 which disclose that the wife has bank account. Learned advocate for the petitioner husband submits that the learned Family Court fell in error in assessing the amount of maintenance on higher side without having any evidence on record. She would also submit that the impugned judgment and order indicates that the learned Family Court has employed guess work to record that the husband is earning Rs.1 to 1.5 Lakhs per month and the wife is entitled to maintenance to that extent or as per the status of the husband.

6. Lastly, it is submitted that the revision deserves consideration and requires to be allowed to interfere with the impugned judgment and order at least to the extent of reducing the amount of maintenance granted to the wife.

7. On the other hand, learned advoca