Ramavtar Yadav vs Soniya Yadav

Shantanu Kemkar, J.

This revision has been filed by the applicant against the order dated 19-11-2002 passed by the Family Court, Rewa in Case No. 35/2002.

The applicant is the husband of the respondent. The respondent wife filed an application u/s 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Family Court, Rewa alleging therein that she is legally wedded wife of the applicant and out of wedlock is having four married daughters. It has been alleged that after conceiving four daughters the applicant has started harassing and ill-treating her as he wanted a son. The applicant soon after the death of his elder brother started living with his ''Bhabhi'' treating her to be his wife and ousted the respondent from the house. The respondent had further alleged in her application that she being old has become unable to maintain herself. The applicant husband is in service in Rewa University and is drawing Rs. 5000/- per month as salary and Rs. 10 to 12 thousand income from 5 acres of agricultural land of his own. He also earns from the sale of milk of Cow, Bufallo and Goat and also by the Tractor owned by him. Thus though having sufficient means he is neglecting to maintain the respondent.

The applicant husband resisted the application submitted his reply and denied the allegations of ill treatment, he submitted that the respondent herself without any just and reasonable cause, is living separately. He has no enough means to maintain the respondent. He was and still ready to live with his wife.

The Trial Court framed issues and recorded the evidence led by the parties and held that the applicant after the death of his brother has kept his widow as his wife and has conceived two sons from her. The Trial Court has further held that the applicant is earning Rs. 4000/- per month by salary and income from his agricultural land. The Trial Court considering the income of the applicant to be Rs. 4000/- per month awarded the sum of Rs. 1000/- towards maintenance to the respondent.

The applicant husband has challenged this order by filing the present revision.

I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the record. From the perusal of evidence of Soniya (PW1), Parniya (PW2) and Heeralal (PW3) it is amply proved that the applicant has started living with his brother''s wife and conceived two sons from her. He illtreated the respondent thereby she has been forced to live separately. The respondent being unable to maintain herself, claimed the maintenance from the applicant. The evidence about income of the applicant has also been correctly assessed by the Trial Court. The applicant in rebuttal examined Sukhlal (DW 2) and Chhotelal (DW 3) both these witnesses in their cross examination have admitted that the applicant has married to his brother''s wife and from whom he has two sons. Thus, from the evidence on record it has been duly proved that the respondent was having just cause for not living with the applicant husband and also that the applicant without any just and sufficient cause has neglected in maintaining the respondent. Thus the impugned order by which the applicant''s income has been assessed to Rs. 4000/per month and out of which he has been ordered to pay Rs. 1000/- as maintenance to the respondent being just and proper needs no interference. The finding of the Court below is based on sound appreciation of evidence and needs no interference by this Court.

Accordingly, this Criminal Revision is dismissed. No order as to costs.