KRISHAN KUMAR Vs. POOJA YADAV @ PRIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-Krishan Kumar is aggrieved by an order dated 05.06.2012 of learned Metropolitan Magistrate (Mahila Court) in Complaint Case No.96/10/12 by which he was directed to pay Rs. 2,500/- as interim maintenance to the respondent wife from the date of filing of the petition in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have examined the file. The relationship of husband and wife is not in dispute. The respondent-wife claimed that she had no independent source of income to maintain herself. In response, thereto, the petitioner alleged that she was employed in a private concern and had a monthly income of Rs. 5,000/-. He, however, did not disclose as to where the respondent was employed and what was her designation. No documents like salary certificate, appointment letter etc. were produced to ascertain if the respondent was gainfully employed in any private concern. Apparently, the respondent is unable to maintain herself having no independent income.

(3.) Regarding income of the petitioner, the Trial Court did not believe the respondent that he had income of Rs. 25,000/- p.m. on plying of an auto rickshaw, Rs. 10,000/- p.m. from agricultural land and Rs. 15,000/- p.m. as rent. The respondent did not substantiate her assertions by any cogent document. The petitioner claimed that being a student in Satyawati college, he had no source of income and was dependent upon his 'uncle' for his livelihood.