THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SEC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT., AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2025 PASSED IN CRL. MISC NO.17/2024 ON THE FILE OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MYSURU, PARTLY ALLOWING THE PETITION FILED UNDER SEC.125 OF Cr.P.C., FOR MAINTENANCE.

THIS REVISION PETITION FAMILY COURT HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 09.03.2026 AND COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE K.MANMADHA RAO

CAV ORDER

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner–husband under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 15.02.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Mysuru (‘the Family Court’ for short), whereby the Family Court allowed the application filed by the respondents–wife and minor children under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and directed the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month each, to respondents 2 and 3 from the date of the petition till they get married.

2. The parties will be referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court. Petitioner No.1 is wife, Petitioners 2 and 3 are minor children and respondent is the husband before the Family Court.

Brief facts leading to the filing of the petition are as under:

3. The marriage between the Petitioner No.1-wife and the respondent-husband was solemnized on 25.02.2018 at Hunsur Taluk in Mysuru district as per Hindu customs and rituals. During the marriage parents of wife had given 100 grams of golden ornaments and ½ kg., of silver articles and cash of Rs.2,00,000/- as dowry to the respondent and spent Rs.1,00,000/- towards other articles. Petitioner No.1 was physically and mentally harassed by husband for further dowry and the reason that Petitioners 2 and 3 both are female issues. Petitioner No.1 filed a petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., seeking maintenance.

4. After service of notice, the respondent entered appearance and filed objections denying the allegations made in the petition. The respondent contended that he is not keeping good health and he has no sufficient source of income to maintain himself and not able to maintain petitioners. That Petitioner is earning Rs.17,000/- p.m., and it is her responsibility to maintain him and sought for dismissal of petition.

5. The Petitioner No.1 has deposed before the Court as P.W.1 and she has produced 22 documents marked as Ex.P1 to Ex.P22. Respondent deposed as R.W.1 and relied upon 06 documents marked as Ex.R1 to Ex.R6. It is contended that respondent made illegal demand for dowry and site and neglected to maintain his wife and minor daughters. It is alleged that he drove petitioners out of matrimonial house. Per contra, husband has contended that petitioner No.1 herself drove him out of the house of her parents. PW.1-wife has deposed that initially for one week, she was in the house of PW.1 and thereafter, Petitioners 1 to 3 started residing in a rented house. PW.1 further deposed that respondent has got extra-marital affair and produced Ex.P13-photograph to that effect. Further she has deposed that she is drawing a salary of Rs.10,000/- p.m. Ex.R5 and Ex.R6 are documents got marked by respondent’s counsel in order to prove that properties are joint family properties and are under dispute. RW.1-husband has denied that he is doing any real estate business and contract work. He has denied allegation that he is having illicit relationship with his colleague Aishwarya.

6. Learned counsel for the husband contended that he is not having sufficient income to maintain himself. Further it is alleged that wife is having sufficient income to maintain herself and minor daughters. It is submitted that the Family Court failed to appreciate that the document produced by the petitioner as Ex.R1 to Ex.R4 clearly show that petitioner/husband is suffering from various deceases and not able to maintain himself as he is not having sufficient income.

7. Learne