Balkishan @ Chhotu Lal Soni vs State Of Rajasthan And Ors

Instant revision petition has been filed against the order dated 06.12.2018 passed by the learned Family Court, Bhilwara whereby the learned Family Court has allowed the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent No.2 and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent No.2 from the date of application i.e. 13.02.2018.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the Family Court vide order dated 23.05.1990 allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the respondent No.2 and ordered the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.400/- per month as maintenance to the respondent No.2. Subsequently after a lapse of so many years, the respondent No.2 filed the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Bhilwara on 03.02.2018 and the Family Court straightway allowed the said application and ordered the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.12,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent No.2 from the date of application. Counsel for the petitioner submits that though the notices of the said application were issued to the petitioner but the same have not been served upon him. Therefore an ex-parte order was passed by the Family Court without hearing the petitioner. Counsel submits that before passing the impugned order, at least an opportunity of hearing should have been afforded to the petitioner. It is therefore prayed that the matter may be remanded back and the Family Court may be directed to pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioner, in accordance with law.

Per contra, counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the petitioner is not paying anything to the respondent N.2 and the Family Court has observed in the order that service was affected upon the petitioner and only thereafter the order on the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. has been passed. Thus no interference is called for by this Court. In the alternative, counsel submits that if this Court remands the matter back to the Family Court for rehearing, then the petitioner should be directed to deposit some amount of maintenance before the trial court.

I have considered the arguments advanced before me and carefully gone through the record.

Earlier the Family Court allowed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and ordered the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.400/- per month as maintenance to the respondent No.2 and subsequently the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. was filed by the respondent No.2 on 03.02.2018. The Family Court issued notice of the said application to the petitioner. The copy of the notice was supplied by the petitioner in which only a signature has been mentioned. Whether proper service was affected on the petitioner or not, it is doubtful. But the fact remains that before passing the order impugned the petitioner was not heard.

In view of above, the impugned order dated 06.12.2018 passed by the Family Court, Bhilwara is set aside subject to the condition that the petitioner shall deposit a demand draft of Rs.45,000/- in the name of respondent No.2 Smt. Hemlata before the Family Court within a period of two weeks from today. On deposition of demand draft, the same shall be handed over to the respondent No.2 Smt. Hemlata on a proper application being filed. The matter is remanded back to the Family Court, Bhilwara with the direction to pass fresh order on the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. after hearing the petitioner as well as respondent No.2, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of presentation of certified copy of this order.

The revision petition stands disposed of accordingly. Stay application is also decided.