High Court · 2025

1. Instant Criminal Revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 01.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court Gautam Budh Nagar, in Maintenance Case No.461 of 2020 (Smt. Manisha @ Swati Vs. Rajeev Sharma) under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

2. By the impugned order learned trial court has awarded Rs.13,000/- as interim maintenance to the applicant from the date of filing of application dated 03.10.2020 to date of judgment dated 01.05.2024. The arrear of maintenance is directed to be paid within three months, since the date of order. It is also directed that the opposite party will pay and keep on paying the maintenance to the applicant for a sum of Rs.13,000/- per month on regular basis from the date of order.

3. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent and perused the material available on record.

4. The factual matrix of the case in brief are that respondent had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the court below with averments that her marriage was performed with opposite party on 12.12.2016, in which her father had spent around Rs.30 Lakh. The father of the applicant had given a Honda Amaze Car worth Rs.9 lakh, cash and jewellery to his daughter and son-in-law, even then the opposite party and his family members are not satisfied, they demanded Rs.5 lakh cash as additional dowry and when the applicant expressed her inability to fulfill their demand through her parents, they started harassing and torturing her daughter. She was abused and ill treated at her matrimonial place on regular basis, and ultimately she was thrown out from her matrimonial home with warning that unless she come back with Rs.5 Lakh cash and a Scarpio she will be treated in similar manner. When she told this incident to her father, her father borrowed Rs.2 Lakh cash and handed it over to her in-laws to shut their mouth, even then her ordeal continued and she was subjected to violence, maltreatment at her matrimonial place every now and then.

5. On 07.10.2020 at around 11:30 pm her husband and in-laws accompanied with two unknown persons had assaulted her in brutal manner, in which she suffered serious injuries on her person and she was given treatment in Government Hospital. Her husband Rajeev Sharma is posted as Senior Technical Sales Engineer in JMV LPS Ltd. Company, Noida Sector 11, from where he earns Rs.70,000/- per month as salary. Apart from that her father in law owns 23 Bigha agricultural land and earns Rs.1 Lakh per month therefrom as income and the opposite party has deserted the applicant without sufficient reason and she compelled to take shelter at her parental place.

6. Applicant had filed an application for interim maintenance before the court below, wherein she has stated that the monthly earning of opposite party and his family members is about Rs.2,50,000/-, therefore she should be granted interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.60,000/- per month.

7. Learned court below has allowed the application for interim maintenance by impugned order, wherein she has been granted Rs.13,000/- per month as maintenance from the date of filing of application.

8. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that revisionist has stated that the both the parties have filed their statement of affidavit of disclosure of income, assets and liabilities in compliance of directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another 2021 (2) SCC 324. The revisionist has stated there in his affidavit that he was earlier getting Rs.13,500/- per month as salary from the Company in which he works, but after his incarceration in jail he only gets commission in lieu of salary, he has filed his Bank Statement of his account which reveals that Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- are credited in his bank Account as commission on monthly basis, which is sometime even less than that. As his monthly earning is itself less than Rs.15,000/-, it is not possible for him to pay Rs.13,000/ as interim maintenance to his wife. He further submitted that in the impugned order this fact is wrongly stated that opposite party has stated that his monthly salary is Rs.1,62,000/- per month, in fact he has stated in his statement that his monthly income is Rs.13,500/- per month and annual income is Rs.1,62,000/- and on that basis a wrongly interpretation has been made regarding his source of income. His wife herself earns around Rs.18,000/- per month, as she works as a beautician in parlour at Dadari.

9. He further submitted that keeping in view the fact that revisionist is a man of lessor economic resources and the amount of interim maintenance is liable to be reduced substantially.

10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that revisionist belongs to an affluent family, his father is possessed of 20 Bigha agricultural land, in which various sorts of plants including flowers are grown. Revisionist is working as Senior Technical Sales Engineer in JMV LPS Ltd. Company, Noida Sector 11 and earns handsome salary therefrom. The revisionist has concealed his salary account and instead he has filed some other bank account to show that that his earnings are lesser than what is claimed by the applicant. He further submitted that learned court below has not committed any factual or legal error while fixing Rs.13,000/- per month as interim maintenance from the date of filing of application. The impugned order needs no interference in the present revision.

11. Learned court below in the impugned order has stated that both the parties have filed their respective affidavits of disclosure of assets of income and liabilities in compliance of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another 2021 (2) SCC 324. The opposite party (Rajeev Sharma) has refuted the claim of the applicant in regard to his income and has stated in his written statement that he works in JMV LPS Lt. Company Noida Sector-11 since 13.06.2017 from where he earns only Rs.1,62,000/- annually and accordingly his monthly income comes around Rs.13,500/-. However, he was sent to jail and his earnings decreased and now he only gets commission in lieu of salary and is working in the Company on the basis of commission. He lost her regular job in the company due to long incarceration at the behest of the applicant wife in criminal case lodged against him.

12. Learned court below also observed that the opposite party failed to adduced any evidence in support of his version that the applicant gets Rs.18,000/- per month from her alleged job as a beautician. The applicant has stated in her affidavit of income that she is not having any independent source of income. The opposite party has shown his academic qualification as B.Tech in his affidavit 16 Kha and he has mentioned his job as Sales Engineer in JMV Company. However, he has shown his monthly income only Rs.13,500/-. He has also stated in his affidavit 14 Kha (16.11.2022) that his father owns 19.5 Bigha agricultural land and he has not shown any documents or salary slip in support of his salaried income.

13. Learned court below also observed that opposite party is duty bound to maintain his wife and therefore it appears lawful to provide her Rs.13,000/- per month as interim maintenance.

14. In affidavit of disclosure of income, assets and liabilities, opposite has stated that his marriage was solemnized on 12.12.2016 with the applicant and after his incarceration he only gets commission in lieu of salary from the said Company, but he has failed to file any salary slip or statement of commission received from the company in lieu of his services rendered to the Company. He has filed only account statement of Bank Account lying at SBI, Gautam Budh Nagar, during the period 01.01.2021 to 11.03.2023, to show that he is a man of meager income. He has shown his parents as dependent on him, but he has admitted that his father owns 19.5 Bigha Agricultural land.

15. Learned court below has directed the opposite party in order sheet dated 27.02.2023 to file his salary slip alongwith required details of ITR, but he had not filed these documents and instead he filed his bank statement of his alleged salay account. He is a technical qualification of B.Tech and works in said private Company JMV LPS Ltd. Company Sector-11 Noida since 2017 and it is hardly believable that he was getting only Rs.13,500/- as salary prior to his incarceration in the criminal case lodged against him at the instance of respondent No.2. His father owns 19.5 Bigha Agricultural land according to the version of opposite party himself and accordingly the revisionist must have been getting some monetary benefit from his agricultural income also. However, as the current monthly income of the revisionist is not proved precisely, on record, some reduction is liable to be made for interim maintenance awarded to the applicant in the impugned order, in the interest of justice, and also for the purpose of balancing of equities between the parties. Therefore, the interim maintenance awarded in the impugned order is liable to be reduced from Rs.13,000/- per month to Rs.8,000/- per month.

16. It is accordingly, directed that the amount of maintenance awarded to the applicant from the date of filing of application to date of judgment and onwards is reduced from Rs.13,000/- per month to Rs.8,000/- per month. The arrear of maintenance from the date of filing of application to March, 2025 will be payable in five equal monthly installments. First installment will be due on 30.04.2025 and remaining four installments will be payable in succeeding months. Apart from this the revisionist will pay and continue to pay the modified maintenance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per month from April, 2025 onwards on regular basis, subject to other terms and conditions imposed in the impugned order.

17. However, with the above observation and modification the revision is partly allowed.

18. It is made clear that compliance of payment of maintenance to respondent No.2 by the revisionist shall be made without fail. In default of payment of maintenance, coercive process shall be issued by the court below against the revisionist to realize the maintenance amount as directed in the order. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Ashish/- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Instant Criminal Revision has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 01.05.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court Gautam Budh Nagar, in Maintenance Case No.461 of 2020 (Smt. Manisha @ Swati Vs. Rajeev Sharma) under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

2. By the impugned order learned trial court has awarded Rs.13,000/- as interim maintenance to the applicant from the date of filing of application dated 03.10.2020 to date of judgment dated 01.05.2024. The arrear of maintenance is directed to be paid within three months, since the date of order. It is also directed that the opposite party will pay and keep on paying the maintenance to the applicant for a sum of Rs.13,000/- per month on regular basis from the date of order.

3. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent and perused the material available on record.

4. The factual matrix of the case in brief are that respondent had filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the court below with averments that her marriage was performed with opposite party on 12.12.2016, in which her father had spent around Rs.30 Lakh. The father of the applicant had given a Honda Amaze Car worth Rs.9 lakh, cash and jewellery to his daughter and son-in-law, even then the opposite party and his family members are not satisfied, they demanded Rs.5 lakh cash as additional dowry and when the applicant expressed her inability to fulfill their demand through her parents, they started harassing and torturing her daughter. She was abused and ill treated at her matrimonial place on regular basis, and ultimately she was thrown out from her matrimonial home with warning that unless she come back with Rs.5 Lakh cash and a Scarpio she will be treated in similar manner. When she told this incident to her father, her father borrowed Rs.2 Lakh cash and handed it over to her in-laws to shut their mouth, even then her ordeal continued and she was subjected to violence, maltreatment at her matrimonial place every now and then.

5. On 07.10.2020 at around 11:30 pm her husband and in-laws accompanied with two unknown persons had assaulted her in brutal manner, in which she suffered serious injuries on her person and she was given treatment in Government Hospital. Her husband Rajeev Sharma is posted as Senior Technical Sales Engineer in JMV LPS Ltd. Company, Noida Sector 11, from where he earns Rs.70,000/- per month as salary. Apart from that her father in law owns 23 Bigha agricultural land and earns Rs.1 Lakh per month therefrom as income and the opposite party has deserted the applicant without sufficient reason and she compelled to take shelter at her parental place.

6. Applicant had filed an application for interim maintenance before the court below, wherein she has stated that the monthly earning of opposite party and his family members is about Rs.2,50,000/-, therefore she should be granted interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.60,000/- per month.

7. Learned court below has allowed the application for interim maintenance by impugned order, wherein she has been granted Rs.13,000/- per month as maintenance from the date of filing of application.

8. Learned counsel for the revisionist submits that revisionist has stated that the both the parties have filed their statement of affidavit of disclosure of income, assets and liabilities in compliance of directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another 2021 (2) SCC 324. The revisionist has stated there in his affidavit that he was earlier getting Rs.13,500/- per month as salary from the Company in which he works, but after his incarceration in jail he only gets commission in lieu of salary, he has filed his Bank Statement of his account which reveals that Rs.10,000/- to Rs.15,000/- are credited in his bank Account as commission on monthly basis, which is sometime even less than that. As his monthly earning is itself less than Rs.15,000/-, it is not possible for him to pay Rs.13,000/ as interim maintenance to his wife. He further submitted that in the impugned order this fact is wrongly stated that opposite party has stated that his monthly salary is Rs.1,62,000/- per month, in fact he has stated in his statement that his monthly income is Rs.13,500/- per month and annual income is Rs.1,62,000/- and on that basis a wrongly interpretation has been made regarding his source of income. His wife herself earns around Rs.18,000/- per month, as she works as a beautician in parlour at Dadari.

9. He further submitted that keeping in view the fact that revisionist is a man of lessor economic resources and the amount of interim maintenance is liable to be reduced substantially.

10. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No.2 submitted that revisionist belongs to an affluent family, his father is possessed of 20 Bigha agricultural land, in which various sorts of plants including flowers are grown. Revisionist is working as Senior Technical Sales Engineer in JMV LPS Ltd. Company, Noida Sector 11 and earns handsome salary therefrom. The revisionist has concealed his salary account and instead he has filed some other bank account to show that that his earnings are lesser than what is claimed by the applicant. He further submitted that learned court below has not committed any factual or legal error while fixing Rs.13,000/- per month as interim maintenance from the date of filing of application. The impugned order needs no interference in the present revision.

11. Learned court below in the impugned order has stated that both the parties have filed their respective affidavits of disclosure of assets of income and liabilities in compliance of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another 2021 (2) SCC 324. The opposite party (Rajeev Sharma) has refuted the claim of the applicant in regard to his income and has stated in his written statement that he works in JMV LPS Lt. Company Noida Sector-11 since 13.06.2017 from where he earns only Rs.1,62,000/- annually and accordingly his monthly income comes around Rs.13,500/-. However, he was sent to jail and his earnings decreased and now he only gets commission in lieu of salary and is working in the Company on the basis of commission. He lost her regular job in the company due to long incarceration at the behest of the applicant wife in criminal case lodged against him.

12. Learned court below also observed that the opposite party failed to adduced any evidence in support of his version that the applicant gets Rs.18,000/- per month from her alleged job as a beautician. The applicant has stated in her affidavit of income that she is not having any independent source of income. The opposite party has shown his academic qualification as B.Tech in his affidavit 16 Kha and he has mentioned his job as Sales Engineer in JMV Company. However, he has shown his monthly income only Rs.13,500/-. He has also stated in his affidavit 14 Kha (16.11.2022) that his father owns 19.5 Bigha agricultural land and he has not shown any documents or salary slip in support of his salaried income.

13. Learned court below also observed that opposite party is duty bound to maintain his wife and therefore it appears lawful to provide her Rs.13,000/- per month as interim maintenance.

14. In affidavit of disclosure of income, assets and liabilities, opposite has stated that his marriage was solemnized on 12.12.2016 with the applicant and after his incarceration he only gets commission in lieu of salary from the said Company, but he has failed to file any salary slip or statement of commission received from the company in lieu of his services rendered to the Company. He has filed only account statement of Bank Account lying at SBI, Gautam Budh Nagar, during the period 01.01.2021 to 11.03.2023, to show that he is a man of meager income. He has shown his parents as dependent on him, but he has admitted that his father owns 19.5 Bigha Agricultural land.

15. Learned court below has directed the opposite party in order sheet dated 27.02.2023 to file his salary slip alongwith required details of ITR, but he had not filed these documents and instead he filed his bank statement of his alleged salay account. He is a technical qualification of B.Tech and works in said private Company JMV LPS Ltd. Company Sector-11 Noida since 2017 and it is hardly believable that he was getting only Rs.13,500/- as salary prior to his incarceration in the criminal case lodged against him at the instance of respondent No.2. His father owns 19.5 Bigha Agricultural land according to the version of opposite party himself and accordingly the revisionist must have been getting some monetary benefit from his agricultural income also. However, as the current monthly income of the revisionist is not proved precisely, on record, some reduction is liable to be made for interim maintenance awarded to the applicant in the impugned order, in the interest of justice, and also for the purpose of balancing of equities between the parties. Therefore, the interim maintenance awarded in the impugned order is liable to be reduced from Rs.13,000/- per month to Rs.8,000/- per month.

16. It is accordingly, directed that the amount of maintenance awarded to the applicant from the date of filing of application to date of judgment and onwards is reduced from Rs.13,000/- per month to Rs.8,000/- per month. The arrear of maintenance from the date of filing of application to March, 2025 will be payable in five equal monthly installments. First installment will be due on 30.04.2025 and remaining four installments will be payable in succeeding months. Apart from this the revisionist will pay and continue to pay the modified maintenance at the rate of Rs.8,000/- per month from April, 2025 onwards on regular basis, subject to other terms and conditions imposed in the impugned order.

17. However, with the above observation and modification the revision is partly allowed.

18. It is made clear that compliance of payment of maintenance to respondent No.2 by the revisionist shall be made without fail. In default of payment of maintenance, coercive process shall be issued by the court below against the revisionist to realize the maintenance amount as directed in the order. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Ashish/- ASHISH KUMAR SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad