Laxman Singh vs Rekha

Virendra Singh, J.—This revision has been preferred by revisionist Laxman Singh against the order dated 15.2.2002 passed by learned III Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mathura in case No.65 of 2001, Smt. Rekha Vs. Laxman, under section 125 Cr.P.C, whereby the learned lower court has awarded maintenance to the tune of Rs. 500/ per month only in favour of the respondent, Smt. Rekha.

At the time of hearing of this revision, no one appeared on behalf of revisionist.

I have gone through the grounds mentioned in the memo of this revision.

It is stated in the grounds of this revision that the revisionist never behaved with the respondent Smt. Rekha with cruelty and the respondent herself misbehaved with the revisionist and his parents. She had gone from the revisionist''s house without the permission of the revisionist or his parents. The revisionist always remained ready and he always tried to maintain the relation with the respondent and to keep her with him. He had also filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights and the learned trial court committed error in not considering this fact. The respondent herself is earning a sum of Rs.2000/ in the work of swing and weaving while the revisionist is an unemployed person and has no source of income. The respondent had also filed an application under section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act which was rejected by learned II Additional Civil Judge( Senior Division) Mathura.

In the light of the aforesaid grounds, I have gone through the facts and circumstances on record as are narrated in the impugned order. It reveals that there had been dispute in between the parties of criminal nature regarding demand of dowry as well as the dispute pending in between the parties for restitution of conjugal rights and the divorce too. In such circumstances the right of maintenance of the respondent can not be denied. Such type of atmosphere in the family where the wife is subjected to the demand of dowry establishing the factum of cruelty and making the relations tense in between the wife and husband reaching up to the proceedings of rival legal remedies available for restitution of conjugal rights by the husband and the divorce by the wife are sufficient grounds for the wife living separately and claiming for maintenance.

So far as the question of quantum of amount of maintenance is concerned, I do not find any substance on record to interfere in the impugned order as Rs.500/ per month as maintenance allowance ordered to be paid to the revisionist for the respondent is not excessive. Therefore, this revision has no force and is liable to be rejected and is hereby dismissed accordingly.