REKHA Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned Amicus Curiae, learned counsel for the revisionist-wife, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record.

(2.) Succinctly, the brief facts outlined in the application filed u/s 125 Cr. P.C. by the revisionist-wife are that the revisionist-wife married to respondent-husband on 2/7/2012 as per Hindu rites and ceremonies and approximately Rs.10.00 lacs were spent on the solemnization of the marriage by the revisionist-wife's parents. The revisionist-wife was discharging all the matrimonial obligations, and on 8/3/2015, a baby girl was born out of the said wedlock, who is residing with the revisionist-wife. Despite performing all matrimonial obligations, the in-laws started raising demands of dowry and perpetuating cruelty on the revisionist-wife mentally and physically both. The younger brother of the respondent-husband had attempted to outrage the modesty of the revisionist-wife many a times, to which she complained to her husband, but he continued to do so as the revisionist-wife's husband kept silent. On 16/12/2024, a panchayat was convened in the village. The family members from the in-laws side were persuaded to keep the revisionist-wife in good condition, but the respondent-husband kept on perpetuating cruelty to the revisionist-wife. On 25/12/2017, the respondent-husband's younger brother attempted to commit rape upon the revisionist-wife, and when she complained to her husband, she was assaulted and abused in filthy language. A medical was also conducted on 27/12/2017 at the District Hospital Saharanpur. Since 27/12/2017, the revisionist-wife has been living separately, and lastly stated that the respondent-husband works as a Supervisor in a factory, and besides the job, he also owns a welding machine at Fatehpur Road and earns more than Rs.45,000.00 per month, whereas revisionist-wife has no source of income, and she is living a life of destitute.

(3.) The respondent-husband has refused to maintain the revisionist-wife, therefore, she had approached the learned Family Judge for maintenance by way of application u/s 125 Cr. P.C. wherein the learned Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court-II/Family Judge, Saharanpur vide order dtd. 19/4/2019 awarded Rs.5000.00 per month to the revisionist-wife and Rs.3000.00 per month the the minor child till she attains the age of majority or solemnization of her marriage, towards maintenance, but the respondent-husband has not paid even a single penny to the destitute wife. Aggrieved by the order dtd. 19/4/2019, the respondent-husband approached the learned Family Court by way of application u/s 126(2) Cr. P.C. for setting aside the ex-parte order dtd. 19/4/2019, which was allowed vide order dtd. 17/1/2023, and the ex-parte maintenance order dtd. 19/4/2019 was set aside and restored to its original number and status subject to cost of Rs.1500.00. Thereafter, on 30/11/2023, the application was erroneously dismissed for want of prosecution.