A husband’s legal and social obligation to provide maintenance persists notwithstanding his spouse’s minor or insufficient independent income, provided the wife lacks the financial capacity to maintain a standard of living commensurate with the marital status and the husband possesses the ability to support her.

JUDGMENT :

HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.

1. When the matter is called out for hearing, none appears for the applicant. Therefore, it clearly appears that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the present matter. Hence, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Taj Mohammad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, decided on 11.08.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.2421 of 2023, this Court has considered the averments made in the application as well as the material placed on record and has proceeded to decide the matter in the absence of the applicant based on available material on record.

2. By way of the present application, the applicant has requested this Court to quash and set aside the judgment and order dated 21.04.2022 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.41 of 2021.

3. It is the case of the applicant that the applicant and respondent No. 2 were married on 21.07.2017 as per Muslim Shariyat rituals at Jamnagar. After the marriage, the respondent No. 2 started residing at the matrimonial home with the applicant at Solapur, Maharashtra, where the applicant was living along with his sons and their families from his first marriage. In January 2018, the respondent No. 2, allegedly due to disputes with the family members and other issues, voluntarily left the matrimonial home and started residing separately. Thereafter, the applicant made several efforts to bring her back and also attempted to resolve the disputes amicably, including through mediation, but the respondent No. 2 did not return and raised demands which, according to the applicant, were unreasonable. Subsequently, on 18.02.2021, the respondent No. 2 filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 41 of 2021 before the learned Family Court at Jamnagar seeking maintenance. During the pendency of the said proceedings, the applicant also initiated proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court at Solapur in April 2021. Ultimately, the learned Family Court, Jamnagar, vide order dated 21.04.2022, partly allowed the application and directed the applicant to pay Rs. 15,000/- per month towards maintenance to the respondent No. 2, which is under challenge in the present proceedings.

4. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

5. It is submitted in the Revision Application that the learned Trial Court has erred in passing the impugned order without properly appreciating the material on record, inasmuch as the respondent No. 2 has failed to produce any cogent or reliable evidence in support of her claim for maintenance, particularly with regard to her income. It is further submitted that the respondent No. 2 has not approached the Court with clean hands and has deliberately suppressed material facts including her income, status, and foreign travel details. The learned advocate further contends that the Trial Court has failed to consider the mandate of Section 125 (4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which disentitles a wife from claiming maintenance if she, without sufficient reason, refuses to reside with her husband, and in the present case, despite repeated efforts made by the applicant, the respondent No. 2 has refused to return to the matrimonial home. It is also submitted that the respondent No. 2 has shown disregard to the judicial process by avoiding service of summons in the restitution proceedings initiated by the applicant. The learned advocate further submits that the application