DEEPAK NENAWATI Vs. KAVITA NENAWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision Petition challenge has been made to the order dtd. 23/9/2022 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court No. 1, Bhilwara in Criminal Misc. Case No. 166/2021 whereby the proceedings u/Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. have been decided finally and the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.16,000.00 per month to the respondent-applicant till the point of time she remarries. The amount was to be paid from the date of filing of the application, i.e. 5/7/2021.

(2.) Bereft of elaborate details, the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant criminal revision petition are that an application under Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. came to be submitted at the behest of the respondent-applicant before the learned Family Court No. 1, Bhilwara (hereinafter for short 'the trial Court') averring therein that her marriage got solemnized with the petitioner on 10/6/2015. At the time of marriage, the petitioner was working somewhere in Dubai (UAE). After marriage, she was also taken to Dubai, where the couple spent happy marital life for three months but thereafter, she was sent back to Bhilwara to live with her in-laws. It is alleged that on several occasions, the respondent-wife insisted the petitioner to take her with him to Dubai and to perform the conjugal duties but he never conceded to her prayer. It is alleged that the respondent-applicant-wife was not having sufficient means to maintain her and as such, she was dependent on the petitioner. She also alleged that she was subjected to maltreatment by her in laws. It is alleged that her in- laws had created such compelling circumstances under which, she was constrained to go to her parents home. It is also alleged that she was not getting a single penny from the petitioner as maintenance. She contended that she was not having sufficient means to maintain herself and she needed Rs.30,000.00 per month at the least to meet her daily/basic needs. It is specifically pleaded that the petitioner works as an accountant at Silk Route Creation General Trading, Dubai and thus, is getting Rs.80,000.00 per month as salary.

(3.) Upon registration of the case, the learned trial Court directed to issued notice to the petitioner. Since the petitioner was residing in Dubai, therefore, service of notice was effected upon him through email. However, the petitioner failed to appear before the Family Court and due to his non- appearance, vide order dtd. 4/1/2022, the learned Judge, Family Court directed to proceed ex-parte against him. On 5/3/2022, when the evidence of the respondent-wife was recorded, one Shri Shailendra Nanavati, brother of the petitioner moved an application mentioning therein that a power of attorney was given by the petitioner in his favour to appear on his behalf. It is noted that the petitioner himself had sent an e-mail on 21/2/2022 to the learned trial Court for setting aside the ex-parte proceedings. However, the learned trial Court was not convinced with the application moved through e-mail as also the application filed by the brother of the petitioner and proceeded further in the matter. After recording the statement of the respondent-wife, the learned trial Court has allowed the application filed by the respondent-wife vide order dtd. 23/9/2022 and accordingly, has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.16,000.00 per month from the date of filing of the application, i.e. 5/7/2021, till she does not re-marry and the same is under assail before this Court.