ROOHI NAAZ Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dtd. 19/12/2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, court no. 19, Kanpur Nagar in Criminal Appeal No. 119 of 2023 as well as order dtd. 4/9/2023 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar. By the impugned order, learned revisional court has affirmed the order dtd. 4/9/2023 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate whereby Rs.1,000.00 per month as interim maintenance has been awarded to the respondent no. 2 in proceeding under sec. 23 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

(3.) Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the interim maintenance awarded to the revisionist is paltry sum of Rs.1,000.00 per month. This meagre amount is absolutely insufficient for respondent no. 2 to maintain herself. Both the courts below have committed legal and factual error while awarding such a paltry sum towards maintenance. He further submitted that this is admitted fact that the respondent no. 2 was working in Dubai prior and now he states that he left his job due to litigation between the parties. He is supposed to have earned sufficiently by working in Dubai (UAE) earlier. The respondent no. 2 is an able bodied person and there are catena of decisions that an unemployed person, who is able bodied, is bound to maintain her wife and minor children. Prior to passing of impugned order, Rs.3,000.00 per month interim maintenance was awarded in proceeding under sec. 125 Cr.P.C. to the revisionist. However, neither respondent no. 2 has paid any sum pursuance to previous interim maintenance order passed in proceeding under sec. 125 Cr.P.C. nor towards the compliance of the impugned order. As a matter of fact, the respondent no. 2 has paid nothing to the revisionist as yet. He next submitted that the respondent no. 2 has leveled allegations against the revisionist of living adultery without any evidence. The revisionist has filed a criminal case under sec. 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act against the respondent no. 2 vide Case Crime no. 50 of 2016 at police station Chamanganj, district Kanpur Nagar but same was closed during investigation on the basis of settlement entered between the parties on 28/10/2016. However, respondent no. 2 continued high handedness towards and practicing cruelty against the revisionist and for that reasons she again registered an FIR against him vide Case Crime no. 16 of 2019 under sec. 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act at police station Mahila Thana, District Kanpur Nagar. She is victim of domestic violence. Only Rs.5,000.00 were paid by the respondent no. 2 while entering into a compromise on 8/11/2016 in furtherance of previous criminal case. Due to non payment of maintenance amount, revisionist is devoid of any means to maintain herself, therefore, it is prayed that amount of maintenance awarded in the impugned order passed by the courts below be enhanced substantially so that the revisionist may be able to make her both hands needs. The amount awarded towards maintenance is too meagre and insufficient.