A husband cannot absolve his statutory liability to maintain his legal wife and minor children by claiming indigence or desertion if he fails to rebut the presumption of legitimacy and demonstrates financial capacity by supporting a second family.

THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE PASSED BY THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, BELAGAVI IN CRL.MISC.NO.201/2022 DATED 11.02.2025 AND DISMISS THE PETITION IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE GEETHA K.B.

ORAL ORDER

1. Even though the case is at the stage of hearing on I.A.s, with the consent of both sides, heard arguments on merits.

2. This revision petition is filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the order dated 11.02.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.201/2022 on the file of Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’, for brevity), whereby maintenance of ₹10,000/- per month is awarded to petitioner No.1 (present respondent No.1) and ₹5,000/- each is awarded to petitioner Nos.2 to 5.

3. The parties are referred with their ranks as they were before the Trial Court for the sake of convenience and clarity,

4. Petitioner Nos.1 to 5 filed the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., seeking maintenance of ₹45,000/- per month along with litigation expenses of ₹10,000/-.

5. The case of the petitioners before the Trial Court, in nut shell is that;

5.1. Petitioner No.1 is the legally wedded wife of respondent; petitioners No.2 to 4 are the children of petitioner No.1 and respondent; and petitioner No.5 is the mother of the respondent.

5.2. It is stated in the petition that the marriage of petitioner No.1 with respondent was solemnized on 14.02.2005 at Kadroli Math, M.K. Hubballi, as per Hindu rites and customs prevailing in their community. After the marriage, they led happy marital life. The parents of petitioner No.1 spent substantial amount on the marriage and provided gold, costly clothes, utensils, and other articles etc., by raising loans from friends and relatives.

5.3. Petitioner No.1 and respondent led happy marital life till 2010. Thereafter, respondent allegedly developed illicit relationship with one Smt. Sudha, and out of the said relationship, they got a daughter named Nikita, aged about 12 years, and a son aged about 8 years.

5.4. Subsequently, respondent stopped providing food, clothing, and medical expenses to the petitioners and started harassing petitioner No.1 both physically and mentally, demanded dowry for construction of house. The parents of petitioner No.1 were unable to satisfy these demands of respondent due to their poor financial condition.

5.5. It is further alleged that the respondent is addicted to bad vices such as drinking alcohol and would return home late at night in an intoxicated state and was mercilessly assaulting and abusing petitioner No.1. He also prevented her from communicating with her parents. Petitioner No.1 kept mum in the hope that the respondent would reform and they may lead happy marital life. However, respondent ultimately drove the petitioners out of matrimonial home after snatching her gold ornaments. Thus, petitioner Nos.1 to 4 took shelter in the parental home of petitioner No.1. Thereafter, parents of petitioner No.1 went to the house of respondent with elders of their locality to reconcile, but respondent refused and allegedly assaulted his mother.

5.6. Petitioner No.5, the mother of the respondent, is also started residing separately in a rented house and is unable to maintain herself.

5.7. Petitioner Nos.1 to 4 are staying in parental house of