PARAMJIT KUMAR Vs. JASWINDER KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JASWINDER Kaur a legally wedded wife of Paramjit Kaur moved an application under Section 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant for maintenance on the allegations that she was neglected by her husband Paramjit Kaur who had sufficient means to support her. According to her she did not own any movable or immovable property of her own and was unable to maintain itself. She also prayed that interim maintenance may be granted to her at the rate of Rs. 570/- per month beside the litigation expenses.

(2.) THE application was opposed by Paramjit Kumar who contended that his wife had sufficient means and was able to maintain herself. He denied that he neglected or refused to maintain her and pleaded that she herself had left his house leaving behind a minor daughter with him.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had produced documentary evidence in the form of affidavits of various persons who had deposed that the respondent was earning more than Rs. 500/- per month by stitching clothes but this fact was not taken note of by the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner had also produced letters written by the respondent to one Harmesh Kumar which showed that the respondent was having some illicit affair with Harmesh Kumar and as such was not entitled to any maintenance. The submission of the learned counsel is devoid of any force. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has thoroughly discussed all the contentions raised before him on behalf of petitioner and came to the conclusion that the respondent wife had no source of income and prima facie she was entitled to interim maintenance. The grounds on which the Trial Court rejected the claim of the respondent, were quite frivolous and rejection of the claim was not based on any legal reasoning. The amount of interim maintenance allowed is hardly sufficient for subsistence and the prayer of the petitioner to reduce the same cannot be allowed, and so also his contention that it should be granted from the date of the order. The impugned order is well reasoned, legal and proper. There is no justification to interfere with the same. The petition is hereby dismissed being without any merit. Petition dismissed.