RUKSANA BEGUM & OTHERS Vs. MOHAMMAD RAFIQ @ LALLU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision filed on behalf of the petitioner wife Ruksana Begum is directed against the order dated 29.11.2013 passed by the Court of Principal Judge Family Court, Rewa in MJC.No.70/2011, whereby minor son and daughter of petitioner Ruksana Begum were granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.1500/- per month each but prayer for maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. made on behalf of the wife Ruksana was rejected.

(2.) The facts necessary for disposal of this criminal revision may be summarized as hereunder: The revision petitioner wife Ruksana Begum filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C in the Court of Principal Judge Family Court, Rewa, on 08.04.2011 praying for maintenance for herself and her minor daughter Firdaus and minor son Atiq. It was pleaded in the petition that petitioner Ruksana Begum is a legally wedded wife of respondent Mohammad Rafiq. Their marriage was solemnized under Muslim Law continues to subsist. Petitioner Ruksana Begum has four sons and two daughters from the respondent. One daughter Firdaus aged 14 years and one son Atiq aged 12 years on the date of the petition, lived with the petitioner. Ever since their marriage, the respondent husband used to harass and beat up petitioner Ruksana in connection with his demand for dowry. Ultimately, in the year 2002, i.e. 9 years before the filing of petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., the respondent husband beat up the petitioner wife and expelled her from her matrimonial home. The petitioner has since been living with her sister in the same city along with her minor son and daughter. The respondent has married second time and is living with his second wife. He is not maintaining the petitioner wife and her minor children. The respondent husband runs a mobile phone shop and earns about Rs.20,000/- per month but he is neglecting to maintain the petitioner and her minor children.

(3.) The respondent has opposed the application pleading that he never harassed or beat up his wife for dowry. The petitioner wife, under the influence of her elder sister, left the respondent with her jewellery etc. and is living with her. She is keeping her minor children with her forcibly. The respondent has not contracted second marriage. He is ready to keep his wife and children and maintain them. The petitioner wife runs a juice center and earns about Rs.25,000/- per month. She makes her minor children work in the juice centre. Respondent husband has no means of regular earning and is dependent upon physical labour. He is required to maintain his four children. Petitioner's sister is married to respondent's elder brother. Whenever, petitioner demands partition of the ancestral property, respondent's elder brother incites the petitioner to create trouble in the life of the respondent.