THE HON’BLE SMT.JUSTICE TIRUMALA DEVI EADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.10289 of 2025

ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed by the petitioner-respondent aggrieved by the order dated 02.05.2025 passed in M.P. No.302 of 2023 in MC No.253 of 2025 by the I-Additional Family Court cum XIV Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.

2. Heard Mr. Khaleel Ahmed Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1-State and Sri Habeeb Imran Al Hashmi, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. The parties are hereinafter referred as they arrayed before the trial court for the sake of convenience.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent-husband has submitted that the petitioner-wife refused for consummation of marriage and never lived in a cordial relationship with the respondent and that she has left his company on her own volition and therefore, is not entitled to any maintenance. He further submitted that the respondent is ready to accept the petitioner even as on date, but she is not willing to join him. Further, she has demanded huge amount as maintenance and the trial court had committed an error in grating interim maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month. He further submitted that the respondent cannot support the petitioner by giving such a huge amount of Rs.25,000/- as he has his own living expenses and responsibilities of his parents. He further submitted that though the respondent was an employee at Dubai, at present he is not working and not earning anything and therefore, he is not able to bear the said expenses. He, therefore, prayed to set aside the orders passed by the trial court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner-wife has submitted that the submission of the respondent-husband that he is not earning anything is utterly false and that no documents are filed to show that he has left his job and further has not filed the assets and liabilities statement so far before the trial court. He further submitted that the respondent is working in Dubai for many years and was earning huge amounts and just to evade the payment of maintenance to the petitioner, he has come up with the false story and prayed to dismiss the petition and confirm the order passed by the trial court granting interim maintenance of Rs.25.000/- per month.

6. Perused the record.

7. Admittedly, both the petitioner and the respondent are wife and husband and the wife is living away from her husband. Their marriage has taken place in the year 2022. The husband is shown to be a B.Com., Computer Graduate, working in the Finance Department of a reputed company as an Accountant at Dubai and is alleged to be earning Rs.2,00,000/- per month, apart from which he is having own properties at Hyderabad earning rent of Rs.25,000/- per month and that his total earnings are around Rs.2,25,000/- per month and that he has no other responsibilities. The case of the petitioner is that she is unable to maintain herself as she is a household lady and is not able to earn anything. She further submitted that due to the harassment meted out by the respondent, she had to leave his society and that the husband refused to maintain her to avoid his responsibility.

8. It is alleged by the respondent that the petitioner did not allow for consummation of marriage and that he applied for the VISA of his wife, but she denied to travel to Dubai and requested for some more time. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that non-willingness of the petitioner itself shows that she has left the society of the respondent on her own and thus, the respondent need not maintain her any more. However, all these issues fall for consideration during the course of trial and a logical end can be arrived at only after a full-fledged trial. But for the present, since both of them are living separately and it is not shown that the petitioner-wife is earning something for her sustenance, it would be the responsibility of th