Order

24/02/2025 The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner husband challenging the order dated 15.06.2018 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Udaipur in Criminal Revision No. 19/2016 whereby, while allowing the revision petition filed by the respondent, set aside the order dated 04.06.2016 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanod, District Udaipur dismissing the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and directed the petitioner to pay maintenance in the sum of Rs.

3000/- per month from the date of application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner husband submits that the learned revisional court has committed an error of law in awarding maintenance amount of Rs. 3,000/- per month without taking into consideration the fact that the respondent herself left the matrimonial home without any reason or compulsion in the year 1990 and residing separately for last 26 years. It is argued the respondent has got independent source of income as she has been living separately since year 1990 and therefore, the learned Magistrate had rightly dismissed the application filed by the respondent under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Now after so many years, the respondent had filed the application only with a view to harass the petitioner, and therefore, the impugned order dated

15.06.2018 is liable to be quashed and set aside.

Per contra, counsel for the respondent submits that soon after marriage, the husband and his family members started harassing the wife for dowry. The petitioner husband, completely neglected the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that petitioner is a Government employee whereas, the respondent is having no independent source of income, therefore, the amount of maintenance in the sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month is a meagre amount, therefore, the amount of maintenance may be adequately enhanced.

I have considered the arguments on behalf of petitioner so also carefully scanned the record.

Section 125 of the Code makes provision for the grant of maintenance to wives, children and parents. Sub-section (1) of Section 125 inter alia says that if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain his wife who is unable to maintain herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife.

A holistic reading of the provisions would clearly reveal that the responsibility and liability of a person to maintain his wife, children and parents rests on the condition that if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain them (wife, children, parents), he can be ordered to make a monthly allowance for maintenance for his wife or child or parents at such monthly rate.

In the instant case, the learned Additional Sessions Judge after considering the entire evidence held the respondent to be entitled for maintenance as the husband neglected to maintain her and awarded maintenance vide order dated 15.06.2018. The fact that respondent wife is not having any independent source of income has also been taken into consideration by the Additional Sessions Judge as the petitioner had failed to produce on record any document with regard to income of respondent wife. Considering the fact that the petitioner is working as Helper in the PHED and earning a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month and that respondent is not having any independent source of income so also looking to the present necessities of life, price index which is rising by leaps and bounds every day and other factors, Rs.

3,000/- per month to respondent seems to be justified.

In the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 15.06.2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.3, Udaipur cannot be said to be capricious or perverse. Accordingly, the present revision petition having no force, is hereby dismissed. Stay petition is also dismissed. Petitioner is directed to make payment of