SHARMILA BAI Vs. BALWANT SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicants have filed this revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by the order Smt. Sharmila Bai and Anr. vs. Balwant Singh @ Bablu dated 30.06.2016 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Vidisha in Miscellaneous Judicial Case No.15/2015 (Smt. Sharmilabai and another vs. Balwant Singh @ Bablu), whereby the application of the petitioner-wife under Section 127 of CrPC has been partly accepted and the amount of maintenance has been enhanced from Rs.1100/- per month to Rs.2000/- per month in favour of applicant No.1-wife.

(2.) The facts giving rise to filing of this revision are that initially the applicants had filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC before JMFC Vidisha for granting the maintenance on the ground that the applicant No.1 is the legally wedded wife of respondent and applicant No.2 is the daughter born out of wedlock of applicant No.1 and respondent. The applicant No.2 is minor and she is residing with the applicant No.1. The respondent has harassed and tortured the applicant No.1 due to non-fulfillment of the illegal demand of motorcycle and colour television by the respondent and when she did not fulfill the said demand, the respondent had beaten her. When the applicant No.2 was in the womb of the applicant No.1, at that time the respondent had kicked in the womb of the applicant No.1 and respondent has thrown the applicants out of the house since then they are residing in the house of applicant No.1's father. The respondent is not permitting them to live along with him and in between the respondent has got married with the daughter of Nandlal Dangi, who resides in Madankhedi, Vidisha. Applicant No.1 is illiterate and her father is very poor while the respondent is having 100 bighas land. Since the applicants are unable to maintain themselves, hence prayed for a direction to the respondent to pay the reasonable maintenance in favour of the applicants.

(3.) The respondent filed the reply of the application denying all the allegations and he stated that the applicant No.1 is having source of income and she is able to maintain herself and she is living separately without sufficient reason. It was also submitted through reply that the respondent is having 25 bighas land only, out of which he has to survive himself, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the application for maintenance.