JAISHREE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Revision is admitted and heard for final disposal. The revision is filed against judgment and order of petition bearing No. E-238/10 which was pending in family Court, Aurangabad. The proceeding was filed u/s. 125 of Cr.P.C. by applicants. The family Court has granted relief of monthly maintenance in favour of applicant No. 2 Master Harsh but application of applicant No. 1 Smt. Jaishree is dismissed. Both sides are heard.

(2.) This Court has gone through the record of family Court. Applicant No. 1 Jaishree has given admission that her so-called marriage with present respondent No. 2 was in Gandharv form. Thus, she admits that there were no rites or ceremonies of the marriage. Respondent No. 2 has admitted that Master Harsh was born to Jaishree from him. Due to these circumstances, family Court has rejected application of Jaishree and had granted maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1000/- to the son of applicant No. 1.

(3.) Family Court has taken support of observations made by this Court in case in the case of Sau. Manda R. Thaore v. Ramaji Ghanshyam Thaore,2010 5 LJSOFT 13. On this point, case in the case of Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat and others, 2005 AIR(SC) 1809. The Apex Court has laid down that the wife mentioned in Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is a lady who has undergone marriage ceremony. In that case, when it was second marriage, Apex Court held that the second wife was not entitled to get maintenance. In the present case, though the facts are different, the evidence of Jaishree shows that there was no marriage between her and respondent No. 2. In view of these circumstances, there is no possibility of interference in the decision of family Court given to dismiss the claim of Jaishree.