HITESH Vs. SAU PRIYANKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petition is filed to challenge the judgment and order delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Kopargaon, Dist Ahmednagar, in Criminal Revision No. 21/2010. This revision was filed by the present petitioner against judgment and order of Misc. Application No. 190/07 which was pending the Court of JMFC Kopargaon. The proceeding before JMFC was filed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and the JMFC has granted total maintenance of Rs. 1500/- in favour of the respondents. Both sides are heard. It is the case of wife that she was given in marriage to the present petitioner in the year 2005 and son Om is born to her out of this wedlock. It is her case that at the time of the marriage, gold ornaments and other household items were gifted by her parents and the marriage expenses were born by her parents but the husband and relatives were not satisfied with these gifts. It is her case that after few days of the marriage, ill treatment was started to her by husband and relatives.

(2.) The wife has made specific allegations against the husband that his behaviour was strange, he used to take pills and used to harass her sexually. She has contended that the husband had taken her nude photographs and when she asked about it, he gave threats to her. It is her case that she somehow tolerated the ill treatment but the husband then started demanding Rs. 2 lac from her parents as he wanted to invest this amount in gold-smith shop. It is her case that the demand was not met with, so more ill treatment was given to her. It is her case that when she was carrying 9 months, she was sent to the house of parents and warning was given that she should not be sent to matrimonial house unless demand of Rs. 2 lac was met with.

(3.) It is the case of the wife that she delivered male child but the husband did not come to the house of her parents to see the child. It is her case that the husband put a condition that the amount of Rs. 2 lac must be paid to him first. It is her case that she gave notice to the husband but false reply was given to the notice by the husband. It is her case that due to ill treatment given by husband, she gave report against the husband to the police and police filed case against husband. It is the case of the wife that she has no source of income and she is unable to maintain herself and the son. It is her case that the family of the husband and his parents own gold smith shop and tailoring firm. It is her case that the brother of the husband has opened new gold smith shop at Nizampur. It is her case that the annual income of husband is Rs. 4-5 lac and he is in a position to give separate maintenance. Before JMFC, she had claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1500/- for herself and for the child.