CRL. REV. P. 56/2018

Page 1 of 18

*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Reserved on: 21^st April, 2022

Pronounced on: 10^th June, 2022

+

CRL. REV. P. 56/2018

JYOTI @ GAYATRI

..... Petitioner

Through:

Ms. Manika Tripathy (DHCLSC) and

Mr. Manish Vashist, Advocates

versus

ROHIT SHARMA @ SANTOSH SHARMA ..... Respondent

Through:

Respondent in-person

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH

J U D G M E N T

CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J.

1.

The instant criminal revision petition has been filed under Sections

397 and 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

1973 (hereinafter “Cr.P.C”) by the revisionist seeking enhancement of

quantum of maintenance awarded vide Judgment dated 27^th November,

2017 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Central District, Tis

Hazari, Delhi (hereinafter “learned Principal Judge”) in MT No.

5861929/2016 claiming it to be on the lower side.

2.

Brief facts of the case are as follows:

i.

The marriage between revisionist and respondent was

solemnised on 11^th July, 2008 as per the Hindu rites and

ceremonies at Delhi. No issue was born from the said wedlock.

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002308

CRL. REV. P. 56/2018

Page 2 of 18

It is alleged that revisionist was abused, insulted and ill-treated

for bringing insufficient dowry by the respondent/husband and

his family members. It is further alleged that Respondent is an

alcoholic person having affairs with other women. It is also

alleged that the respondent and his parents demanded cash

amount of Rs. 10 Lacs for supporting the business of the

husband/respondent. Since the revisionist failed to bring dowry

of Rs. 10 Lacs, she was thrown out of her matrimonial home

on 28^th October 2008.

ii.

The revisionist was totally neglected by the respondent and

was unable to maintain herself. She is totally dependent upon

her parents. She has filed a petition under Section 125 of the

Cr.P.C for her maintenance. Since the respondent started

absenting from the proceedings, Court proceeded ex-parte on

11^th December 2015.

iii.

Vide Judgment dated 27^th November 2017, the petition under

Section 125 of the Cr.P.C was allowed by the learned Principal

Judge, by which the respondent was directed to pay litigation

cost of Rs. 11,000/- and maintenance, as follows:

a)

Rs. 2,000/- per month from the date of filing of the

petition i.e 26^th May, 2010 to 25^th May, 2015;

b)

Rs. 2,500/- per month w.e.f 26^th May, 2015 to 27^th

November, 2017; and

This is a digitally signed Judgement.

NEUTRAL CITATION NO: 2022/DHC/002308

CRL. REV. P. 56/2018

Page 3 of 18

c)

Rs, 3,000/- per month w.e.f from 27^th November 2017

till such time revisionist gets remarried.

3.

Being aggrieved by the inadequate maintenance, awarded by the

learned Family Court vide judgment dated 27^th November 2017, revisionist

has preferred the instant revision petition for the enhancement of the

maintenance amount.

SUBMISSIONS

4.

The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that she was thrown

out of the matrimonial house on 28^th October 2008. Since then she is living

with her parents and is totally dependent upon them. The maintenance

awarded to tune of Rs. 3,000/-, is very inadequate for her sustenance.

Whereas, the respondent/husband is working as the Incharge in Guru Bhog

Floor Mill, Lawrence Road, Delhi, and drawing salary of Rs.82,000/- per

month. But the Court below has not considered the fact that the respondent

is trying to hide his actual salary and has deliberately not furnished any

income proof or salary slip to prove his case. It is submitted that revisionist

has claimed maintenance @ Rs.35,000/- per month for her livelihood.

5.

The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that from day one

of the marriage, the respondent and his family members were very cruel

towards the revisionist. The respondent and his family members were