ABHISHEK VERMA Vs. VAISHNAVI VERMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C seeking to set aside impugned orders dated 06.06.2013 by which the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 4000/- as maintenance from the date of order and the order dated 07.11.2013 by which maintenance was made payable from the date of filing of the petition.

(2.) In brief, it was stated in the petition filed seeking maintenance that the petitioner Abhishek Verma promised to marry Khushboo and it is thereafter both got involved in a physical relationship. Out of this relationship, a female child was born on 28.07.2008. The family and friends of Khushboo Verma, tried to convince the petitioner herein to solemnize a marriage but to no avail. After the birth of the daughter, Khushboo Verma filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C seeking maintenance for herself and the minor child on the ground that she had lost her job on account of her pregnancy and being unemployed was unable to maintain herself and the minor. Along with the said application, interim maintenance was sought as well. The petition for grant of maintenance was contested on the ground that there is no relationship between the parties, while arguing that the petitioner- respondent has no source of income being confined in Model Jail, Chandigarh in criminal proceedings that had been initiated, in which he stood convicted. DNA analysis report was submitted showing the petitioner herein to be the biological father of the minor. The application for interim maintenance was disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- per month from the date of the application. Thereafter, on appreciation of the evidence, maintenance was allowed payable to the minor, Vaishnavi Verma @ Rs. 4000/- per month from the date of the order dated 06.06.2013. Khushboo Verma by a separate statement dated 05.06.2013 withdrew her petition claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Aggrieved against the order of maintenance, two revision petitions were preferred. One revision was instituted by the petitioner herein challenging the order of maintenance being highly excessive, and the other revision was instituted by the minor Vaishnavi Verma claiming maintenance from the date of filing of the petition. The Sessions Judge, Chandigarh dismissed the petition as filed by the petitioner while allowing the modification in the petition filed by the minor to the extent that she would be entitled to get maintenance from the date of filing of the petition. Aggrieved against the said order, the instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been preferred.

(3.) Mr. D.K. Bhatti, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that he was incarcerated on account of criminal proceedings initiated against him from August 2008 to March 2011 and, therefore, while in custody, he did not have sufficient means to pay maintenance and, therefore, could not have been fastened with a liability to pay maintenance @ Rs. 4000/- per month, payable from the date of instituting the application under Section 125 Cr. P.C.