SARVANGBHAI MANILAL THAKER Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Mr.K.P.Raval, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No.1 State of Gujarat and Mr.N.D.Buch, learned advocate waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent No.2.

(2.) THE facts of the case stated briefly are that the respondent No.2 herein, who is the wife of the present petitioner, had moved an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the Code) before the Family Court, Ahmedabad being Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.862 of 2003 praying for maintenance at the rate of Rs.500/ - per month. The learned Judge, Family Court, Ahmedabad, vide the impugned order dated 17th July, 2007, allowed the application directing the petitioner herein to pay maintenance to the respondent No.2 at the rate of Rs.500/ - per month with effect from the date of the application i.e. 2nd April, 2003 and at the rate of Rs.800/ - per month from the date of the order, i.e. 17th July, 2007. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed the present petition challenging the said order dated 17th July, 2007.

(3.) MR .C.B.Dastoor, learned advocate for the petitioner has vehemently assailed the impugned order and more particularly, the direction issued by the learned Judge to pay Rs.800/ - per month towards maintenance with effect from the date of the order. It is submitted that the learned Judge has not appreciated the evidence on record in its proper perspective and has failed to see that the respondent No.2 was earning enough to maintain herself and as such, is not entitled to get maintenance. It is submitted that, in any case, the learned Judge could not have granted wider relief than prayed for in the application. It is submitted that though the respondent No.2 had claimed maintenance at Rs.500/ - per month, the learned Judge had suo motu awarded maintenance at Rs.800/ - per month, which is not permissible under law.