LALU RAM GADRI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant revision petition, under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C., petitioner has assailed impugned judgment and order dated 21st of September 2013, passed by Family Court, Rajsamand. By the impugned judgment and order, learned Family Court has allowed maintenance allowance to respondents No.2 & 3 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and quantified amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs.5,000 per month, i.e. Rs.2,500 for each of the respondents. Prayer for grant of maintenance allowance is allowed by the learned Family Court from the date of application.

(2.) The facts, apposite for the purpose of this petition, are that respondents No.2 & 3 jointly filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. stating therein that marriage between petitioner and second respondent was solemnized as per Hindu rites and rituals about a decade back and out of their wedlock respondent No.3 born. The petition further unfurls that till birth of third respondent, matrimonial relations between the spouses remained streamlined but soon thereafter serious acrimony cropped up. The cause of acrimony is attributed by respondents to the petitioner with a specific allegation that he adopted a defiant posture and perpetuated cruelty vis-a-vis respondent No.2 and further demanded dowry. Eventually, the cruel behaviour of the petitioner reached to its optimum level and he started beating second respondent, and this sort of situation forced her to leave matrimonial home with her minor daughter third respondent. Alleging monthly income of the petitioner to the tune of Rs.25,000, the respondents claimed monthly maintenance amounting to Rs.5,000, i.e., Rs.2,500 each. In reply to the application for maintenance, petitioner has seriously disputed the factum of marriage and pleaded that she is not legally wedded wife. In the return, petitioner has also disputed his income and submitted that he is hardly earning Rs.4,000 per month as an Artisan and therefore unable to afford the amount of maintenance claimed by the respondents. While refuting all the allegations of cruelty, petitioner has also submitted in the reply that he is prepared to keep second respondent with him.

(3.) To substantiate her claim for maintenance allowance, second respondent herself appeared in the witness box and also examined one more witness Hemraj. Besides that, two documents showing monthly income of the petitioner were also exhibited. In his defence, petitioner himself appeared in the witness box and examined two other witnesses. Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned Family Court heard final arguments and taking into account a very vital fact that both petitioner and second respondent lived together as spouses, recorded a definite finding that matrimonial relations between both of them subsisted. The learned Family Court has also recorded a definite finding that for summary proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. strict proof of marriage akin to Section 494 IPC is not required and factum of marriage can be determined on the basis of evidence available on record. It is also observed by learned Family Court that living together for number of years may furnish a plausible ground for presuming factum of marriage. In this behalf, learned Family Court has also considered the candid admission of the petitioner that second respondent lived with him as wife and out of their relationship third respondent has born. With all these findings and taking into account the unrebutted evidence tendered by respondents about monthly income of the petitioner, the learned Family Court determined monthly maintenance allowance to respondents to the tune of Rs.5,000.