S. THAVAMANI Vs. POONGODI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Criminal Revision Cases have been filed against order dated dated 19.02.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal Nos.55 of 2019 and 155 of 2019 by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore.

(2.) It is the specific case of the petitioner/husband and respondent/wife is that the petitioner/husband filed a petition in H.M.O.P.NO.264 of 2017 under Section 12(l)(d) before the Sub Court, Tiruppur. On receipt of summons from the Court, the respondent/wife filed a petition in D.V.A.No.9 of 2018 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.11, Pollachi. During the pendency of the said petitions, the respondent/wife filed C.M.P.No.5635 of 2018 in D.V.A.No.9 of 2018 seeking for interim maintenance and the petitioner/husband filed C.M.P.No.8233 of 2018 in D.V.A.No.9 of 2018 seeking for conducting D.N.A Test for the child. After due enquiry, the trial Court allowed the petition filed by the petitioner/husband for conducting D.N.A test (C.M.P.No.8233 of 2018) and dismissed the petition filed by the respondent/wife for maintenance (C.M.P.No.5635 of 2018).

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner in Crl.R.C.No.1196 of 2020 and respondent in Crl.R.C.No.154 of 2021 would submit that admittedly, the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 14.07.2016. Subsequently, the mother of the petitioner died on 31.08.2016, thereafter, the respondent had gone to her parents house and continued to reside there. When the petitioner went to meet his wife/respondent, the parents of the respondent were avoiding the petitioner by giving one reason or other. Thereafter, the petitioner was informed that he was blessed with a boy baby on 22.11.2016 i.e. within 4 V2 months from the date of their marriage. The petitioner was shocked and questioned about the same. Thereafter, the petitioner filed H.M.O.P.No.264 of 2017 before the Sub Court, Tiruppur and the same was pending. However, the respondent/wife has not filed any counter and prolonged the matter. During the pendency of the above said HMOP case, the respondent filed D.V.A.No.9 of 2018 and without proceeding the above said Domestic Violence Act petition, she filed petition for interim maintenance in C.M.P.No.5635 of 2018, which is nothing but abuse of process of law. He would further submit that the respondent/wife suppressed the fact that she was pregnant at the time of marriage and hence, the petitioner/husband filed a petition seeking for DNA test for the child and the same was allowed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.11, Pollachi. The respondent prolonged the case and therefore, the procedure of conducting D.N.A test is pending. Hence, the marriage and paternity of the child is challenged by the petitioner/husband and only in order to escape from that she has misused the law under Domestic Violence Act and therefore, the learned Magistrate has rightly appreciated the entire materials and dismissed the petition filed by the respondent seeking interim maintenance. However, the Lower Appellate Court failed to appreciate the materials and wrongly ordered Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance to the respondent, which warrants interference of this Court.