K C SHASHIDHARAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. R.D. Kinariwala for the applicant, learned advocate Mr. B.S. Raiyani for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 and learned APP Mr. Manan Mehta for the respondent No.1 State being a formal party, since the dispute is matrimonial between husband and wife.

(2.) The applicant herein is husband, whereas respondent No.2 is his wife and respondent No.3 is their daughter. The applicant has challenged the judgment and order dated 5.5.2017 by Family Court, Rajkot in Criminal Misc. Application No.670 of 2013 whereby the applicant is directed to pay Rs.15, 000/- towards maintenance of each respondent Nos.2 and 3 from the date of application i.e. 18.7.2013 till 31.12014 and Rs.22, 500/- towards maintenance for each of the respondent Nos.2 and 3 for the year 2015-16 and Rs.30, 000/- for each of them from the year 2017 onwards. Thereby, the Family Court has awarded in all Rs.30, 000/- towards maintenance for the period between 2013 and 2014; whereas total Rs.45, 000/- for the year 2015 and 2016 and Rs.60, 000/- from the year 2017 onwards per month. In addition to such amount of maintenance, the Family Court has also directed the applicant to pay Rs.10, 00, 000/- to the applicant towards residential accommodation with Rs.10, 000/- towards cost.

(3.) It is undisputed fact that respondent Nos.2 and 3 have preferred such application u/s.125 of the Criminal Procedure Code ('Code', for short) for their maintenance and claimed total Rs.1 Lac from the applicant, contending that they have been harassed and that applicant is earning Rs.25 to 30 Lacs p.m. and is having huge properties, including a bungalow worth Rs.3 Crores and 4 to 5 vehicles. The applicant has initially challenged the right of the respondent for claiming maintenance on different grounds by filing Criminal Revision Application No. 201 of 2014. However, by order dated 11.2014, such revision application was dismissed only with an observation that applicant may initiate proceedings u/s.126(2) and in that case, the trial Court shall decide it in accordance with law, because, probably the trial Court has proceeded further ex-parte against the applicant at the relevant time.