NIKHIL KUMAR JAISWAL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Abhijeet Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri S.N. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

(2.) The instant revision has been preferred by the revisionisthusband against the judgement and order dtd. 28/5/2019 passed by learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Gautambudh Nagar in Case No.59 of 2016, by which the application under Sec. 125 Cr.P.C. moved by opposite party no.2-wife was allowed and the revisionist was directed to pay maintenance amount of Rs.8000.00 per month to opposite party no.2 and Rs.4000.00 per month for his daughter Raina Jaiswal from the date of filing of the application. Feeling aggrieved by it, the revisionist-husband of the opposite party no.2-wife has preferred this revision.

(3.) The brief facts necessary for disposal of this revision is that the marriage of opposite party no.2 Monika Jaiswal was solemnized with revisionist Nikhil Kumar Jaiswal according to Hindu Rites and Rituals on 28/1/2012 at her parent's house at Mohan Road, Deoria and her father had given gifts as dowry beyond his capacity to the in-laws of opposite party no.2. After marriage, she had gone to her matrimonial home and started living with her husband. The family of her in-laws were not satisfied with the dowry given by her father. As soon as she came to her matrimonial home, her husband Nikhil Kumar Jaiswal, mother-in-law, father-in-law and sisters-in-law Abha Jaiswal and Sadhana Jaiswal and brother-in-law Akhil Kumar Jaiswal started demanding Rs.10.00 lacs and Honda City car from her. Upon which, she stated to them that her father is not in a position to meet their additional demand of dowry, but the revisionist and his family members started beating to opposite party no.2 on petty issues. In this regard, she complained to his father-in-law, on which her husband and member of her in-laws family assured her that he will not do it in future and even after that the revisionist and his family members did not deter from their habits and thereafter her father had taken Rs.1,50,000.00 from her brother and given it to the revisionist. The father of opposite party no.2 talked about complaining to the police about it, then the husband of opposite party no.2 took her with him without informing her father to WZ-10A, 2nd Floor, Titarpur near Tagore Garden Metro Station, Delhi and started harassing to opposite party no.2 in routine manner and forcibly committed rape and unnatural sex with her. On crying, shouting by the opposite party no.2, he used to shut her mouth and threatened to kill her if she raised noise and also told that he would not let anyone know. When the revisionist was objected by the nearby persons after hearing the noise, he took the opposite party no.2 to House No-49, Millenniua Village, Alpha Ist, Greater Noida, District Gautambudh Nagar and revisionist started behaving in cruel and inhuman manner with opposite party no.2 as earlier. Whenever, opposite party no.2 went out of the house, her husband used to beat and say her that until he will get Rs.10.00 lacs and Honda City car from her father, he will continue torturing like this. The opposite party no.2 kept on tolerating everything and explained many times to revisionist, but despite this, the behaviour of the revisionist was not changed. Though, the opposite party no.2 started working in Visva Bharti School, Greater Noida despite that, there was no change in the behaviour of the revisionist and his family members, whenever her husband used to talk to his parents and sister and brother, he used to beat her on their instigation and used to say along with his rest family members that his brother was given a flat of Rs.55.00 lacs by his brothers-in-law in dowry, but her father gave him nothing. As soon as the opposite party no.2 became pregnant, she was asked to undergo for ultrasound to know sex of foetus, but the doctor refused to tell the sex of foetus. Thereafter, the opposite party no.2 was taken to Gorakhpur where the doctor on examination told the sex of foetus as girl, thereupon, her husband and in-laws forcibly administered her medicine for abortion prescribed by the doctor, but it failed. When her pregnancy was not terminated by administering medicines forcibly, her husband kicked on her abdomen several times to get rid of unborn female child, due to which she was crying in pain and begging for the life of her unborn child, then her in-laws used to abuse and pressurize her to terminate the pregnancy of female child. On which she called her father to her matrimonial home, where her husband threatened him to kill his daughter unless the demands is fulfilled and told him that if he wants her daughter alive, give him Rs.10.00 lacs. Thereupon, in fear of the life of his daughter, he gave a cheque of Rs.1,50,000.00 to the in-laws. On which, her husband after beating her during pregnancy took her to her parental home on 9/2/2014 and left there. On 3/7/2014, she gave birth to a female child named Raina Jaiswal, regarding which she gave information to her husband and in-laws to which they told that they have no relation with her and her daughter and also asked her to live wherever she wants, but they will not keep her with them. The opposite party no.2, in above situation, is residing with his brother at Noida B-47 Hinden Vihar, Sector-49 Noida, District Gautambudh Nagar along with her daughter and the information was given by the opposite party no.2 to her in-laws, but it was told by them that now they have nothing to do with her and her daughter, whether they live or die, as long as, their demands is not fulfilled, they will not keep her with them. The opposite party no.2 came to her brother's house and started living with her daughter in Noida, about which her husband came to know and started threatening to kill her daughter on phone and on 9/2/2016, he came to her house and tried to take away her daughter forcibly after beating her, but neighbours and pedestrians came there, seeing them, he ran away leaving her daughter. An application was given by the opposite party no.2 to Senior Superintendent of Police, Gautambudh Nagar for action in this regard. She along with her daughter has been living in Sector-49, Noida. Her daughter is minor, due to which she has to stay at home to take care of her. The opposite party no.2 is completely dependent on her brother, because the daughter is infant so she can't even go to work for her livelihood, due to which the life of opposite party no.2 is very pathetic and she is undergoing mental agony. The revisionist is Principal of Sungrace Public School, Farinda and gets salary of Rs.80,000.00 per month and also earning from tuition, so he earns an income of Rs.20,000.00 per month, thus the revisionist earns a total sum of Rs.1,00,000.00 per month. There is no other dependent on the revisionist other than the opposite party no.2 and her daughter. So, Rs.50,000.00 per month should be given as maintenance allowance from the date of submission of application for nutrition.