NOOR NISHA BIBI Vs. NOOR ISSLAM ANSARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The wife and the minor daughter have filed this criminal revision petition against the judgment dtd. 29/4/2015 passed in Maintenance Case No. 68 of 2011, questioning the proprietary of awarding Rs.1000.00 per month as monthly allowance to them for their maintenance.

(2.) In her application Sled under sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant no.l who is wife of the opposite party has claimed maintenance of Rs.10000.00 per month. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 11/6/2007 and the first child unfortunately could not survive - the second child born from the wedlock is the applicant no. 2. The applicant no.l has alleged that at the time of the marriage whatever was given to her was retained by the opposite party and his family members when she was ousted from her matrimonial home on 22/8/2011. She was put to harassment and torture in connection to demand of dowry, sometimes her husband locked her in a room and not provided even food. There arc various other allegations made by her in her application which arc not really necessary to be recorded here. What is important to notice is that the applicant no.l has stated that she has no independent source of income and her husband who has landed properties, tractor and tank has failed to maintain her and her minor daughter. His father is a small businessman and he himself earns about Rs.2.00 lakhs to Rs.2.5 lakhs per annum by growing crops and doing small contracts. The opposite party appeared in the proceeding of maintenance case and filed his show-cause reply controverting the allegations of his wife. Me has gone further and levelled allegations against his wife of having developing relationship with a boy named Rashid Ansari. Me has further alleged that on 25/6/2011 Rashid Ansari committed rape upon his wife and a First Information Report vide Barhait P.S Case No.55 of 2011 was lodged under sec. 376 of the Indian Penal Code and in that case Rashid Ansari was sent to judicial custody. In this background the opposite party has stated that his wife left home with the minor daughter taking away all her belongings.

(3.) During the trial both parties have examined 4 witnesses each in support of their case. Besides herself, the applicant no.l has examined her father, her brother and a distant relative who have deposed in the Court that the opposite party and his family members have driven out the applicants from home and the opposite party was not financially supporting his wife and the minor child. The father of the applicant no.l has stated about income of the opposite party from tank and fishing; over 15 bighas of land he grows 500 mounds grams and 200 mounds paddy besides J 00 mounds wheat. The applicant no.l has reiterated her stand taken in her application under sec. 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and denied that she earns Rs.3000.00 to Rs.4000.00 per month herself. AW3 has however failed to give details of the land and other properties possessed by the opposite party and the brother of applicant no.l has denied the suggestion about khula talaq to her. The opposite party who has examined himself as OPW1 has supported his stand by saying that in Complaint Case No.467 of 2011 his wife has admitted that she has given khula talaq. Me admits that he was sent to judicial custody in connection to criminal case filed by his wife under sec. 498A of the Indian Penal Code. OPW2 has admitted that the opposite party owns a tractor and there were frequent quarrels between the opposite party and his wife. OPW3 has stated that the opposite party was working as helper with a Mason and he has never seen the applicant no. 1 having any interaction with Rashid Ansari. Me has stated that the opposite party has landed property which was less than 2 bighas of land but he does not possess a tank. OPW4 has denied that the opposite party owns 15 bighas of land, tank or a tractor. Various documents were produced by the parties during the trial and on a detailed discussion thereof the learned Principal Judge, Family Court has held as under: