LAWS(RAJ)-2013-1-314

DINESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

Decided On January 23, 2013
DINESH KUMAR Appellant
V/S
State of Rajasthan And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this criminal revision petition, challenge is made to the order dated 20.10.2012 whereby application moved by the respondents No. 2 and 3 under section 125 CrPC has been allowed and given maintenance of Rs. 1000/ - per month each. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that respondents No. 2 and 3 are living separately at their own. Petitioner was and is willing to keep them with him. Prior to filing application under section 125 CrPC, an application for divorce was filed by respondent under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It was on the ground of cruelty and other grounds. The application under section 13 of the Act has already been dismissed by the competent court and, thereafter, present application under section 125 CrPC has been filed by the respondents No. 2 and 3. When the ground of cruelty and other grounds for divorce were not accepted, application under section 125 CrPC should have been dismissed by the court holding that the respondents No. 2 and 3 are living separately at their own.

(2.) I have considered the submissions and perused the record. It has been admitted that on 5.2.2001 marriage took place between petitioner and respondent No. 2 and out of their wedlock, respondent No. 3 -baby girl was born. On allegation of demand of dowry and dispute on that ground resulted in a case for offence under section 498A and 406 IPC and after investigation, challan has been filed against petitioner. Taking note of the aforesaid fact and even the facts in reference to the order under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and considering statements of the witnesses, i find that respondents No. 2 and 3 having no means of earning and, otherwise, they are living separately for reasons. In view of above, application for maintenance has been allowed by the court below granting Rs. 1000/ - per month each to the wife and daughter of the petitioner. In view of discussion made above, impugned order cannot be said to be illegal. I do not find any substance in the criminal revision petition. Hence, petition so as the stay application are dismissed.