ATUL SHRIVASTAVA Vs. APARNA SHRIVASTAVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant/husband has preferred this revision under section 397 of CrPC aggrieved by the order dated 9/5/2008 passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court Gwalior in MCrC No. 150/06, whereby ordered for payment of maintenance amount of Rs. 1,200.00 per month in favour of the respondent-wife against the applicant.

(2.) Briefly stated facts of the case are, respondent is legally wedded wife of the present applicant, their marriage had taken place on 1/6/2003. At the time when the respondent was living with her husband/present applicant, it is allged that the applicant had harassed her couple with demand of dowry and due to this, respondent-wife is forced to live separately. Thereafter, she had also lodged a FIR against the applicant-husband in the Police Station, on which basis a case under section 498-A of IPC had also been registered against the applicant- husband and due to which the respondent-wife is living separately and the present applicant-husband is not paying any maintenance amount to her, therefore, the respondent-wife had filed apetition under section 125 CrPC. before the Family Court, Gwalior. Learned Trial Court after taking the evidence ofboth the parties by the impugned order allowed the petition filed by the wife under section 125 CrPC and granted maintenance amount of Rs. 1,200/- per month in favour of the respondent-wife. Aggrieved by which the applicant-husband came up before this Court by this revision petition.

(3.) In reply, learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned order and submits that due to the harassment and demand of dowry, the respondent- wife is forced to live separately. A criminal litigation is also going on in between the parties and in such circumstances the respondent-wife is having sufficient reason to live separately due to the ill treatment of the husband and thus the trial Court has rightly granted the maintenance amount in favour of the respondent and no grounds are available for any interference in the impugned order passed by the trial Court. Hence, prayed for dismissal of the revision petition.