KISHORI LAL Vs. MAHIMA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is maintained by the petitioner (husband), who was the respondent before the learned Trial Court (hereinafter to called as "the respondent "), under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter to be called as "the Code ") read with Sec. 227 of the Constitution of India for quashing order dated 26.12.2015, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmour, H.P. in criminal revision No. 31-Cr.R/10 of 2015, whereby order dated 19.06.2015, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Nahan, Sirmour, H.P. in criminal petition No. 01/4 of 2013, was affirmed, wherein the respondent (wife), who was the petitioner before the learned Trial Court (hereinafter to be called as "the petitioner "), was granted maintenance to the tune of Rs.7,500.00 per month from the date of passing of the order.

(2.) Briefly stating the facts, giving rise to the present petition are that, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized about 36 years ago, as per Hindu customs and tradition, out of the said wedlock two daughters and a son were born. The relation between the parties remained cordial for about 20 years. However, 16 years back, the petitioner fell down from a tree and her both legs were fractured. As per the respondent, the petitioner did not conduct her treatment properly and she became bedridden. Thereafter, the respondent started misbehaving with her, she was beaten up by him on many occasions and she was sent to the house of her brother. Several efforts were made by the brother of the petitioner to send her back to her matrimonial house, but the respondent refused to reside with her. As per the petitioner, she is residing in the house of his brother, since 07.06.2012 and she has no source of income to maintain herself. On the other hand, the respondent is an Ex. Army personnel, getting pension of Rs. 11,000.00 per month and he had been working in BSNL, from where he was getting salary of Rs. 25,000.00 per month. The respondent is also having agricultural land, wherefrom his monthly income is stated to be Rs. 40,000.00 per month.

(3.) The respondent by filing reply in the learned trial Court, contested the claims of the petitioner and refuted the assertions, as made by her. According to the respondent, relation between the parties became strained about a year and eight months ago, when the brother and son-in-law of the petitioner have started motivating her to misbehave with the respondent. It is further alleged that the petitioner had also relinquished her share in favour of her brother. The respondent denied that the petitioner became bedridden, as he had not provided proper facilities to her. The respondent specifically stated that he had tried his level best to bring the petitioner back, but she refused. The respondent served several legal notices upon her to call her back, but at the instance of her brother, she refused to join the company of the respondent. The respondent has further submitted that previously, he was getting pension of Rs.10,021.00 from Army and Rs. 14,107.00 as salary, from BSNL, as he was working there as Class IV employee. However, as of now he had been retired from BSNL, getting a pension of Rs. 3,996.00 per month and he has no income, as alleged by the petitioner.