HARISH MANSUKHLAL Vs. HANSAGAVRI RAMSHANKER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed by petitioner Harish Mansukhlal (hereinafter referred to as the husband) against the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Bhavnagar in Misc. Criminal Case no. 9 of 1978 and confirmed by the learned Sessions Judge Bhavnagar in Criminal Revision Application no. 25 of 1979 granting maintenance to respondent no. 1 Hansagauri Rameshshanker (hereinafter referred to as the wife) of Rs. 75.00 per month from the husband.

(2.) Unfortunately the love marriage between the boy and the girl of different castes ended into a failure. The wife belongs to Brahmin caste of Vartej near Bhavnagar and the boy belongs to Bania caste of Ahmedabad. At any rate both of them married on 24-1-1977 and both stayed together at Ahmedabad. It also seems that thereafter the families of both the parties reconciled. Thereafter some how or the other on 4-8-1977 the wife left with her father who had come to Ahmedabad and thereafter as per the allegation of the husband because the father of the wife wanted to have a now taxi for his business purposes as he is a driver he went on demanding money and as his desire could not be satisfied he prompted his daughter (i.e. the wife) not to go to her husband. Thereafter the wife gave a notice on 28-11-1977 which was replied to by the husband on 15-12-1977. Thereafter the wife filed the aforesaid application for maintenance in the Court of the learned Magistrate Bhavnagar. The learned Magistrate passed an order in favour of the wife on 25-4-1979 awarding her maintenance of Rs. 75.00 per month. The revision application preferred by the husband against the order of the learned Magistrate was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge Bhavnagar on 6-6-1979. Therefore this petition.

(3.) Both the Courts below on evidence led came to the conclusion that the husband neglected to maintain the wife and there were reasonable grounds for the wife to live separate from the husband. Considering the letters produced and other aspects the learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the wifes life in staying with the husband was not at al free from risk of her life and therefore came to the conclusion that there was cruelty in the husbands approach towards the wife and that her refusal to stay with the husband at Ahmedabad was quite justified. The learned Sessions Judge also on appreciation of the evidence came to the conclusion that there was cruelty to the wife and concluded that as a matter of fact there are sufficient reasons for the wife to refuse to live with the husband because of the cruelty and that her life was certainly in danger as certified both by the father and mother of the husband. He therefore concluded that in that situation the wife could not be expected to live with the husband and therefore the readiness and willingness on the part of the husband does not solve him from liability to pay maintenance when once it has been established that the wife is a woman unable to maintain herself and the husband is the person who has sufficient means but who has neglected or refused to maintain his wife. On this finding the revision petition was dismissed.