Smt. Swati and another v. Sachin Kumar Trivedi), whereby
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:188564 Court No. - 50 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 1741 of 2023 Revisionist :- Sachin Kumar Trivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Rajesh Chandra Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhir Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the revisionists today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the revisionists, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 5.12.2022, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur, in Criminal Case
Legal Reasoning
No.739 of 2021 (CNR No. UPKN 020018912021), (Smt. Swati and another vs. Sachin Kumar Trivedi), whereby the learned court below has rejected the prayer for maintenance made on behalf of applicant No.1, who is wife of present revisionist but awarded maintenance to applicant No.2 namely, Master Akaksh, the son of applicant No.1 and opposite party, who is revisionist before this Court to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month from the date of application to date of judgement and thereafter at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month as maintenance till he attains age of majority. Factual matrix of the case in brief are that the applicant Smt. Swati filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking maintenance from her husband/opposite party for herself as well as for her minor son, stating therein that her marriage with opposite party was solemnized on 14.2.2014 according to Hindu rites and rituals and in her marriage, her father and family members spend around Rs.40 lacs in various items. Opposite party was posted as Production Manager in Multinational Plastic Company, Nigeria. Her maternal uncle also gifted a car worth Rs.8 lacs to her in her marriage. However, after marriage, her father-in-law telephoned her to get the car transferred in his name and threatened her that the marriage will be broken down in case his demand is not fulfilled. After some time her husband also countenanced to the demand of his parents and started ill treating her. The relationship between the spouse got strained and bitter gradually in the course of time. Even she was ill treated by her husband when she went to Nigeria on 19.9.2014 to reside with him. He was not having any affection for her. In November, 2014 she got pregnant and on insistence of her husband and in-laws, her father purchased a plot of around 125 square yards in year 2015, in the name of her mother-in- law. She was sent back to India by her husband when she was pregnant for five months. She gave birth to a male child while residing at her parental home. She was ill treated, insulted and assaulted during the period when she was residing in her matrimonial home. She again went Nigeria to reside with her husband on his assurance on 1.7.2017 but he continued to ill treating her and she returned with her husband on 18.2.2019 to participate in the marriage of her sister-in-law. Her husband is proficient in Plastic Engineering Technology and earns around Rs.5 lacs per month. She is residing at her parental place since October, 2019 as her husband deserted her and failed to take care of her and her minor son. Learned court below summoned the opposite party in maintenance petition where he appeared and filed written objection, in which he admitted the factum of marriage and birth of son but he denied the other accusations and allegations made against him by her wife. He stated that the applicant No.1 herself declined to accompany him to Nigeria on 8.6.2019 on the ground that her father was suffering from cancer. She, herself, deserted him. He is earning around Rs.80,000/- per month in Indian currency. She has left his company without any reason. Learned court below after considering the pleadings and evidence of the parties, gave a finding that the opposite party is residing in Nigeria since 2012 and he has admitted that his monthly income is Rs.80,000/- per month. The applicant No.1 is residing separately with her husband without sufficient reason and from evidence on record, it appears that the opposite party has not neglected to maintain her. Therefore, she is not entitled to get any maintenance from opposite party. However, the opposite party is duty bound to maintain his minor son, who is receiving education. Learned Principal Judge by impugned order awarded maintenance to the tune of Rs.10,000/- per month to applicant No.2 from the date of application to date of judgement and thereafter at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month. The opposite party being aggrieved by impugned order has filed present revision with prayer to allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgement and order in relation to opposite party No.3, the minor son, who born on 19.6.2015. Learned counsel for the revisionists submitted that he has not neglected to maintain his minor and he is ready to maintain him but the amount awarded in impugned order is exorbitant and excessive. The education and other expenses of opposite No.3 are not more than 10,000/- per month but learned court below has awarded an exorbitant amount at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month from the date of judgement, which is main grievance of the revisionist. The revisionist gets a salary which is equivalent to Rs.80,000/- per month in Indian currency. The opposite party No.2 also derives income of Rs.50,000/-, per month by giving tuition and this fact has wrongly denied in counter affidavit of opposite party No.2 in paragraph No.7. However, opposite party No.2 has admitted in her maintenance petition that she is an educated lady and her father is a pensioner, who is any how bearing the expenses of her minor son. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for opposite party No.2 submitted that in counter affidavit this fact is stated that the revisionist is having extra marital affairs with one Khushi Arora and when the opposite party No.2, who is legally wedded wife, made objection to this, she was humiliated and ill treated by the revisionist. She has filed some photographs of the revisionist and said Khushi in support of her contention as Annexure No.1 to the counter affidavit. The revisionist has also filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act against the opposite party No.2 on the ground of desertion and cruelty, which is pending before the competent court. The opposite party also filed a Criminal Revision No.1140 of 2023 against part of the impugned judgement to the extent where the claim of maintenance made by opposite party No.2 has been rejected by the court below but the same has been dismissed by order dated 27.4.2023 passed by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. This is admitted fact that the revisionist is working as a Production Manager in a plastic company in Nigeria. He has admitted his monthly income as Rs.80,000/- per month in Indian currency. He has also stated that he is to bear personal and family responsibilities out of his income. He has not been saddled with the responsibility to provide maintenance to his wife as the claim of the wife for maintenance has been rejected in impugned judgement and the revision filed by the opposite party No.2 has been dismissed by orders of this Court. The revisionist has not denied his responsibility to maintain his minor son, who is residing with opposite party No.2 but his grievance is towards the quantum of maintenance awarded in impugned order. Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, totality of facts and circumstances of the case, this Court finds no substantial error in findings made in impugned judgement. However, the amount of maintenance awarded in impugned judgement to opposite party No.3 from the date of judgement is some what excessive and same is liable to be reduced to some extent. Therefore, it is hereby directed that the amount of maintenance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- per month to opposite party No.3 namely Master Akaksh from the date of filing of application to date of judgement is affirmed but the amount awarded at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month from the date of judgement onwards till attainment of majority is reduced to Rs.15,000/-, per month. It is clarified that after passage of time, the opposite party No.2 will be at liberty to seek enhancement of maintenance awarded and modified by this Court to opposite party No.3 for alteration under Section 127 Cr.P.C. on proof of subsequent facts and further developments and the court concerned will be at liberty to decide the same, independent of any observations made in present judgement.
Decision
The revision stands disposed of, accordingly. Order Date :- 27.9.2023 Kamarjahan Digitally signed by :- KAMARJAHAN ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad