LAWS(CHH)-2014-2-36

SUKANYA Vs. BALAK RAM

Decided On February 14, 2014
SUKANYA Appellant
V/S
BALAK RAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant criminal revision, the applicant has challenged the order dated 10-3-2011 passed by the Family Court, Bilaspur in Misc. Criminal Case No. 235/2007. Facts leading to the instant criminal revision, in brief, are that the applicant had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure along with an application under Section 26 read with Section 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act seeking maintenance of Rs. 5,000 per month or a lump sum of Rs. 7,00,000 as full and final settlement from the non-applicant.

(2.) The case of the applicant before the Court below was that initially the applicant had married to one Ramkripal and after mutual separation (Chor-Chhutti) from her husband Ramkripal as per the customary practice prevailed in the society, she got married to the non-applicant by adopting the system of Churi marriage. Further case of the applicant was that since 2007, the non-applicant started harassing and ill-treating her on various occasions and even tried to kill her which forced her to leave the house of non-applicant. On account of continuous torture and harassment given by the non-applicant, the applicant was left with no other option but to leave the house of non-applicant and therefore, she started residing separately at Chingrajpara, Bilaspur. The applicant being an illiterate and unemployed lady and unable to sustain herself filed the said applications seeking maintenance from the non-applicant, who is earning at least Rs. 15,000 per month.

(3.) Upon notice, the non-applicant appeared before the Court below and filed detailed reply denying the allegation put forth by the applicant for maintenance. In his reply, the non-applicant has denied any sort of marriage with the applicant and has stated that there was no relationship between him and the applicant. He has further stated that the said application has been filed only to harass him, therefore, the application claiming for maintenance should be rejected.