VISHNU KUMAR GUPTA Vs. SHILPI KHAIRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed assailing only para 18 of the impugned order dtd. 2/12/2024 passed in MJCR No.224/2023 (Vishnu Kumar Gupta Vs.Smt Shilpi Khaira and another) whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, District Sehore (M.P.) while allowing the petitioner's application under Sec. 126(2) of Cr.P.C. has directed him to deposit half of the total arrears of maintenance amount i.e. Rs.21,45,000.00 which is Rs.10,72,500.00 within 15 days.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs.5,00,000.00 in compliance of this court order dtd. 17/12/2024 before the Trial Court. It is further submitted that in addition to aforesaid amount he has already deposited Rs.2,74,000.00 against the arrears of maintenance amount. It is contended that when petitioner's application under Sec. 126(2) of Cr.P.C. has been allowed, he cannot be compelled to deposit half of the amount as directed by the learned Family Court. The aforesaid condition by the learned Trial court is contrary to the noble provisions of Sec. 126(2) of Cr.P.C. and to buttress his contention, counsel has placed reliance on Tarun Bhowmick Vs. State of West Bengal and another, 2010 SCC OnLine Cal 1311; Sharafudheen Vs. Nissa P. and another, 2017 SCC OnLine Ker 16383; and Mohanan A. Girija E. and another, 2022 SCC OnLine Ker 6800.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-wife has opposed the petition and has submitted that petitioner is working in USA and more than 22000 dollars are deposited in his account. Respondents are his estranged wife and minor son. Respondent No.1 wife is unemployed and is not able to maintain herself and the minor son who is studying in class IV of St. Anne's School, Sehore. It is submitted that ex parte order was passed by the Family Court in their favour granting total maintenance of Rs.55,000.00, i.e. Rs.30,000.00 in favour of respondent No.1 wife and Rs.25,000.00 in favour of minor son has been set aside subject to aforesaid condition. The condition imposed is laudable and petitioner is liable to fulfill the same. If petitioner fails to fulfill the aforesaid condition, he is not entitled to any relief. As such, it is prayed that revision petition be dismissed.