C R MANJUNATH Vs. PUSHPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a husband's petition calling in question the order dated 29-06-2007 in Crl. Misc. No. 101/2006 on the file of the Judge, Family court, Davangere directing payment of Rs. 800/- per month to his wife and Rs. 700/- per month to his minor son, towards maintenance from 15-04-2006, in addition to Rs. 500/- as litigation expenses.

(2.) THE destitute wife and minor son filed Crl. Misc. 101/2006 under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C. for grant of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 8,000/- per month alleging that the petitioner - husband had refused to maintain them though the petitioner had a monthly income of Rs. 20,000/. That petition was opposed by the respondent in so far as it relates to the quantum of income, while admitting the relationship. The Trial Court, in the premise of the pleadings of the parties and on appreciation of the evidence of PW-1 the wife, vis-a-vis the evidence of RW-1 the petitioner and the documents Exhibits P-1 to P-7 (a) and exhibits R-1 to R-2, recorded a finding that the petitioner's income was Rs. 100/- per day, by his own say, employed as a Driver, and directed payment of Rs. 800/- to the wife and Rs. 700/- to the son per month as maintenance from 15-04-2006, by the order impugned.

(3.) IT is useful to refer to the observations of the Supreme court in the case of DWARIKA PRASAD SATPATHY vs. BIDYUT PRAVA DIXIT AND ANOTHER Their lordships held that, the order passed in an application under Section 125 Cr. P. C. does not finally determine the rights and obligations of the parties and the said section is enacted with a view to provide summary remedy for providing maintenance to a wife, children and parents. The provision under Section 125 is not to be utilized for defeating the rights conferred by the Legislature to the destitute women, children or parents who are victims of social environment.