GEETA SINGH W/O SHRI O.P. MEENA D/O LATE SHRI RAMCHANDRA MEENA, AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS, RESIDENT OF H Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-complainant has filed this Criminal Revision Petition under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 Crimial P.C. against the order dated 2.5.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Criminal Appeal No.70/2015 whereby learned appellate Court by dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner afirmed and upheld the order dated 7.11.2015 passed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur in Case No.270/2015 whereby learned trial Court refused to grant interim monetary relief to the petitioner's daughter Miss. Geetanjali.

(2.) Brief relevant facts for the disposal of this petition are that petitioner-complainant wife of respondent-Shri Omprakash Meena filed a complaint/application under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act ) claiming various reliefs provided under the Act. It was averred in the complaint that she and daughter of the parties Miss. Geetanjali are aggrieved person within the meaning of the Act. One of the reliefs sought is that respondent may be directed to pay 700 pounds per month as living expenditure under Sec. 20 of the Act for the period from Sept. 2014 to April 2015 as arrear accrued for that period and thereafter from May 2015 onwards to Miss. Geetanjali as presently she is pursuing her higher studies at Cardif University, England. It was further averred that petitioner has taken a loan of Rs. 16 lacs from a bank for the further education of their daughter in England. It was also averred that respondent is an Officer of Indian Civil Services and is presently getting Rs.1,96,000.00 per month as salary but he refused to incur the living expenses of Miss. Geetanjali. Petitioner sought interim relief as per Sec. 23 of the Act during the pendency of the complaint. In his reply to the complaint, it was averred by the respondent that presently age of their daughter is 31 years and all her school and college education expenses were incurred by him and even educational and all other expenses for her higher studies at Nottingham, England in the year 2009 were incurred by the respondent. It was further averred that Miss. Geetanjali was sent for further studies/education to England by the complainant without the consent of respondent rather against his wishes. It was also averred that Miss.Geetanjali is a mature girl of 31 years capable of earning her own income and complainant, an Officer of the Rajasthan Administrative Services, is presently getting Rs.1,40,000.00 as salary and she is capable to incur all expenses which are being sought from the respondent. It was further averred that as Miss.Geetanjali is pursuing her higher studies abroad without the consent of her father rather against his wishes, she is not entitled to claim any amount from him as living or other expenses.

(3.) Learned trial Court vide order dated 7.11.2015 declined to grant interim monetary relief claimed as living expenses for pursuing higher studies at a University in England observing that complainant herself is an Administrative Officer in Government of Rajasthan and Miss. Geetanjali has attained the age of 31 years and previously she was in job in Delhi. The matter was unsuccessfully carried by the petitioner in appeal which was dismissed by the appellate Court vide impugned order by recording the same reasons as recorded by the trial Court. It was also observed by the appellate Court that no reliable documentary evidence has been produced on record about higher education of Miss.Geetanjali in England and the expenses incurred by her for her education as well as living expenses.