AARTI SIKARWAR AND ORS. Vs. NAVJOT SIKARWAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall govern the disposal of Criminal Revision No.6183/2018 and Criminal Revision No.233/2019, as both the revisions have been filed against the order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, District Bhind in Case No.12/2014 The petitioners/wife & daughter have filed this revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order dated 25.10.2018 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, District Bhind in Case No.12/2014 (Smt. Aarti Sikarwar & Another vs. Navjot Singh Sikarwar), whereby the application filed under Section 125 of Cr.PC was allowed and maintenance of Rs.3,000/- and Rs.2,000/- per month has been awarded to wife and daughter respectively.

(2.) Criminal Revision No.6183/2018 has been filed by wife and daughter for enhancement of the maintenance amount whereas Criminal Revision No.233/2019 has been filed by the husband for setting aside the order of maintenance.

(3.) The necessary facts of the case are being taken from Criminal Revision No.6183/2018. The facts giving rise to filing of this revision are that petitioners-wife and daughter have filed a case under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, District Bhind for maintenance of herself and her child Shakti Sikarwar who lives with her mother. The marriage was solemnized between the petitioner-wife and respondent-husband on 29.11.2008 as per Hindu rituals and customs. The petitioner No.2 was born on 26.10.2011 from the wedlock of petitioner-wife and her husband-Navjot. In the marriage, father of the petitioner No.1-wife gave Rs.4,00,000/- cash, articles worth Rs.1,00,000/- and also gave ornaments as dowry on demand of respondent. When the petitioner No.1-wife came to in-laws' house in Gwalior, the respondent demanded money i.e. Rs.1,00,000/- from the petitioner No.1-wife and misbehaved with her. Mother-in-law of petitioner No.1-wife died after 15 days of the said incident on 05.01.2009. Respondent went at Mumbai along with petitioner No.1. When petitioner No.1 reached at Mumbai then she came to know about the fact that one friend of respondent-husband namely Syed Tanvir was also residing along with him. When she opposed about the fact of her residing along with his friend Sayed Tanvir, then respondent gave beating to petitioner No.1-wife and used filthy language.