DEVINDER KUMAR Vs. SHAKUNTLA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed against the order passed by learned District Judge, Shimla in Cr. Appeal No. 21-S/10 of 2014, titled Devinder Kumar Vs. Smt. Shakuntla Devi, whereby order dated 17.4.2014 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Court No. 5, Shimla in case No. 53/3 of 2013, titled Smt. Shakuntla Devi Vs. Devender, awarding interim maintenance of Rs.2, 000/- per month payable by petitioner/husband to respondent/wife during pendency of proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (herein after referred to as the Act) before learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. 5, has been affirmed.

(2.) Learned District Judge, in his judgment, has referred the reply to the report filed by petitioner/husband, wherein he has pleaded that after withdrawal of divorce petition, he started business of tent house, with observation that there was no material on record at that stage to reflect that respondent/complainant/wife had any source of income to maintain herself and learned District Judge, on the basis of material on record, has affirmed the order passed by learned trial Court.

(3.) Present petition has been based upon a document i.e. BPL certificate (Annexure P-3) filed with petition in this Court. As per this certificate petitioner Devinder Kumar and his wife Smt.Shakuntla have been shown belonging to a BPL family, but at the same time, this certificate also states that petitioner Devinder Kumar is related to a family living below poverty line, as per BPL survey conducted in the year 2002-03 and this certificate has been stated to be valid for 6 months from the date of its issuance. Though date of issuance of this certificate has been shown as 18th July, 2016, but the fact remains that certificate has been issued on the basis of BPL survey conducted in the year 2002-03, which creates doubt as to whether the said certificate depicts the present status of the petitioner Devinder or not. Even otherwise this certificate is not valid since 18.1.2017. Be that it may be. No such certificate or document was ever placed before the trial Court or learned Appellate Court, rather it appears from the impugned order that there was positive admission of the petitioner that after withdrawal of divorce petition, he started business of tent house. Running the business of tent house and belonging to BPL family is irreconcilable. Without further commenting upon the genuineness and validity of BPL certificate produced by the petitioner in this Court, I am restricting only to say that this certificate cannot be taken into consideration in this petition for alteration/modification or setting aside the order passed by the trial Courts, as the same was never placed before the Courts below and on the basis of material placed before them, no material irregularity or illegality has been committed by learned Courts below in awarding the maintenance amount of Rs.2000/- per month in favour of respondent/wife.