MOHAMMAD SHAHID Vs. SHAHNAZ AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of impugned order dated 24.05.2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh in petition No.1295 of 09.02.2007 and impugned judgment dated 28.09.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh in Criminal Revision No.182 of 2014.

(2.) In short, a marriage was solemnized between petitionerMohammad Shahid and respondent No.1-Shahnaz on 29.05.1989 as per Mohammedan rites and ceremonies. Out of this wedlock, six daughters i.e. respondents No.2 to 7 were born. On account of matrimonial differences, the parties got divorced in the month of August, 2006. Thereafter, the respondents filed a petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance against the petitioner, which petition was allowed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh on 24.05.2014 awarding maintenance @ Rs. 10,000/- per month to respondent No.1 and @ Rs. 3000/- per month each to respondents No.6 and 7. However, respondents No.2 to 5 were denied maintenance on the ground that they have attained majority. The said order passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Chandigarh was challenged in revision by the petitioner herein, however, the same came to be dismissed by the impugned order dated 28.09.2015 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chandigarh. Feeling aggrieved, both the aforesaid orders have been challenged in the instant petition.

(3.) Mr. Samir Rathaur, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argues that both the courts below failed to appreciate the fact that petitioner herein has suffered continuous agony at the hands of respondent No.1 and her brothers as well as other relatives. It is submitted that the petitioner has been turned out of his own house by the respondents, who are still holding possession of the same. It is contended that the petitioner has suffered acute pain and agony through an FIR No.380 dated 02.09.2006, registered at Police Station Manimajra, Chandigarh, under Sections 498-A, 506 of Indian Penal Code, by respondent No.1, in which the petitioner stands acquitted vide judgment dated 24.04.2009. It is argued that both the courts below failed to appreciate the fact that respondents were never neglected by the petitioner, rather, the respondents turned the petitioner out of his own house. It is stated that the respondents are residing in the said house without paying any rent etc. in fact, they have given the first floor of the said house on rent and are earning substantial income from the same. It is also contended that the petitioner herein is working as a Sofa-set repairer, by doing the labour work and has to maintain his own family. It is submitted that the courts below have failed to consider and appreciate the fact that respondent No.1 failed to prove on record the monthly income of the petitioner.