High Court · 2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. As per office report dated 24.1.2025, notice has been served upon opposite party no. 2 but none appeared to represent him.

3. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned order dated 24.7.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2 Meerut in Maintenance Case No. 806 of 2021, P.S. Lisari Gate, Meerut, under section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby learned court below has dismissed application 17B filed by the revisionist for grant of interim maintenance to her.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist had filed an application for interim maintenance purportedly under section 23 in maintenance case with averment that her marriage was solemnized with respondent no. 2 on 11.6.2020 according to Muslim rites and rituals, however, the opposite party no. 2 and his family members due to additional demand of dowry started practising physical and mental cruelty against her. They committed maar-peet with her and for which she had lodged an F.I.R. vide Case Crime No. 109 of 2021 against opposite party no. 2 and family members under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 376, 511 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act at P.S. Mahila District Meerut. She also filed present maintenance case against her husband under section 125 Cr.P.C. but opposite party is not appearing in said case and he threatened her that he would grow old while running in the court and in taking out decision from the Court. Due to non appearance of opposite party for long time, the Court proceeded ex-parte. She prayed for Rs. 25,000/- as interim maintenance from her husband as he runs a factory in the title of Friends Auto Service, District Bijnor wherein 7-8 mechanic worked. He also engaged in business of sale and purchase of old motorcycle and thus his monthly income is about Rs. 1,00,000/-per month.

5. He next submitted that respondent no. 2 had appeared in maintenance case before the learned court below and filed an objection on application for interim maintenance dated 17.5.2022 on 01.03.2023 wherein he stated that he worked in Subh Auto Parts which is situated near Evergreen Banquet Hall Shyohara whose proprietor is Dharmendra Kumar Chauhan wherein he worked as Mechanic and he obtained Rs. 7000/- per month. He also got himself registered in employment office as an unemployed persons. The applicant is highly educated lady who is pursuing course of graduation in Law and she is also running a beauty parlor and fitness club in her house wherein she provides service of health and beauty to women. She also gives tuition to children by which she earns around Rs. 40,000/- per month.

6. He next submitted that the revisionist had filed rejoinder affidavit of said objection filed by the respondent no. 2 on 12.5.2023 and copy thereof was also provided to learned counsel for the opposite party wherein revisionist has stated that she is only Intermediate Educated woman and she has taken shelter at her parental home after having been deserted by her husband. She is pursuing course of LLB from I.I.M.T. College Ganganagar Meerut since the year 2022 after borrowing money from her father to obtain financial independence. She also stated in paragraph no. 4 of objection to application for interim maintenance that opposite party has given absolutely wrong statement that his monthly earning is Rs. 7000/- per month as Assistant Mechanic in the Shubh Auto Parts. He is an educated person. He had double storey house which is situated in area 200 sq. yards and he has obtained a factory in ground portion of said house in area 70-80 square yards where repairing of motorcycle and business of some parts purchasing, is carried out.

7. She has filed a copy of said work shop as annexure no. 2 to rejoinder affidavit wherein she also categorically denied in paragraph no. 5 of rejoinder affidavit that she is running any Beauty parlour and fitness center and give institution to children. She has also said therein that she is pursuing L.L.B course where classes are running from 9.30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. for which she has to leave the house at 7.30 A.M and she came back to home at 6:30 PM. therefore she has no time to be engaged in some other job or occupation. He next submitted that learned court below failed to consider the averments made in application dated 12.5.2023 whereas it is mentioned in impugned order that applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit on 12.5.2023 but no discussion of averments made in rejoinder affidavit dated 12.5.2023, has been mentioned in the impugned order, therefore, the matter may be remanded back to the learned court below for deciding and taking into consideration the rejoinder affidavit and its annexures bearing date 12.5.2023.

8. Perusal of impugned order fortifying the contention made by the learned counsel for the revisionist to the extent that although learned court below has mentioned factum of rejoinder affidavit dated 12.5.2023 and its annexures but the same has not been considered while adjudicating the application for interim maintenance in discussed portion of the impugned order and learned court has wrongly drawn the conclusion placing reliance of pleadings of opposite party that the applicant has failed to prove the fact that she is not able to maintain herself.

9. The learned court below has failed to consider the pleadings of the revisionist while dismissing the application for interim maintenance in the impugned order, therefore, the impugned order is vitiated due to legal error and same is not sustainable in the eye of law. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned court below with the direction to decide the interim maintenance after giving opportunity of hearing to both side in accordance with law within three months from the date of filing the certified copy of this order.

10. The revision is allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 SY SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

2. As per office report dated 24.1.2025, notice has been served upon opposite party no. 2 but none appeared to represent him.

3. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the impugned order dated 24.7.2024 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2 Meerut in Maintenance Case No. 806 of 2021, P.S. Lisari Gate, Meerut, under section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby learned court below has dismissed application 17B filed by the revisionist for grant of interim maintenance to her.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that revisionist had filed an application for interim maintenance purportedly under section 23 in maintenance case with averment that her marriage was solemnized with respondent no. 2 on 11.6.2020 according to Muslim rites and rituals, however, the opposite party no. 2 and his family members due to additional demand of dowry started practising physical and mental cruelty against her. They committed maar-peet with her and for which she had lodged an F.I.R. vide Case Crime No. 109 of 2021 against opposite party no. 2 and family members under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 376, 511 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act at P.S. Mahila District Meerut. She also filed present maintenance case against her husband under section 125 Cr.P.C. but opposite party is not appearing in said case and he threatened her that he would grow old while running in the court and in taking out decision from the Court. Due to non appearance of opposite party for long time, the Court proceeded ex-parte. She prayed for Rs. 25,000/- as interim maintenance from her husband as he runs a factory in the title of Friends Auto Service, District Bijnor wherein 7-8 mechanic worked. He also engaged in business of sale and purchase of old motorcycle and thus his monthly income is about Rs. 1,00,000/-per month.

5. He next submitted that respondent no. 2 had appeared in maintenance case before the learned court below and filed an objection on application for interim maintenance dated 17.5.2022 on 01.03.2023 wherein he stated that he worked in Subh Auto Parts which is situated near Evergreen Banquet Hall Shyohara whose proprietor is Dharmendra Kumar Chauhan wherein he worked as Mechanic and he obtained Rs. 7000/- per month. He also got himself registered in employment office as an unemployed persons. The applicant is highly educated lady who is pursuing course of graduation in Law and she is also running a beauty parlor and fitness club in her house wherein she provides service of health and beauty to women. She also gives tuition to children by which she earns around Rs. 40,000/- per month.

6. He next submitted that the revisionist had filed rejoinder affidavit of said objection filed by the respondent no. 2 on 12.5.2023 and copy thereof was also provided to learned counsel for the opposite party wherein revisionist has stated that she is only Intermediate Educated woman and she has taken shelter at her parental home after having been deserted by her husband. She is pursuing course of LLB from I.I.M.T. College Ganganagar Meerut since the year 2022 after borrowing money from her father to obtain financial independence. She also stated in paragraph no. 4 of objection to application for interim maintenance that opposite party has given absolutely wrong statement that his monthly earning is Rs. 7000/- per month as Assistant Mechanic in the Shubh Auto Parts. He is an educated person. He had double storey house which is situated in area 200 sq. yards and he has obtained a factory in ground portion of said house in area 70-80 square yards where repairing of motorcycle and business of some parts purchasing, is carried out.

7. She has filed a copy of said work shop as annexure no. 2 to rejoinder affidavit wherein she also categorically denied in paragraph no. 5 of rejoinder affidavit that she is running any Beauty parlour and fitness center and give institution to children. She has also said therein that she is pursuing L.L.B course where classes are running from 9.30 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. for which she has to leave the house at 7.30 A.M and she came back to home at 6:30 PM. therefore she has no time to be engaged in some other job or occupation. He next submitted that learned court below failed to consider the averments made in application dated 12.5.2023 whereas it is mentioned in impugned order that applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit on 12.5.2023 but no discussion of averments made in rejoinder affidavit dated 12.5.2023, has been mentioned in the impugned order, therefore, the matter may be remanded back to the learned court below for deciding and taking into consideration the rejoinder affidavit and its annexures bearing date 12.5.2023.

8. Perusal of impugned order fortifying the contention made by the learned counsel for the revisionist to the extent that although learned court below has mentioned factum of rejoinder affidavit dated 12.5.2023 and its annexures but the same has not been considered while adjudicating the application for interim maintenance in discussed portion of the impugned order and learned court has wrongly drawn the conclusion placing reliance of pleadings of opposite party that the applicant has failed to prove the fact that she is not able to maintain herself.

9. The learned court below has failed to consider the pleadings of the revisionist while dismissing the application for interim maintenance in the impugned order, therefore, the impugned order is vitiated due to legal error and same is not sustainable in the eye of law. The impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned court below with the direction to decide the interim maintenance after giving opportunity of hearing to both side in accordance with law within three months from the date of filing the certified copy of this order.

10. The revision is allowed accordingly. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 SY SUSHAMA YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad