JAMSHED MIAN Vs. HALIMA KHATOON

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application the petitioner has challenged the legality of the order dated 14-7-2004 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka awarding maintenance in favour of the applicant/ wife, directing the petitioner/husband to pay Rs. 500/- P. M. from the date of filing of the application under Section 125, Cr. P. C.

(2.) The facts in short are that an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. was filed by Halima Khatoon, i, e. the opposite party herein, for grant of maintenance allowance of Rs. 500/- P. M. It was stated by her that she was legally married wife of the petitioner herein and the marriage between them was solemnized on 3-5-1993 according to Muslim rites and rituals. At the time of marriage, huge amount of dowry was demanded by the husband but the father or the applicant paid only Rs. 25,000/- cash and gave one motorcycle and a wrist watch to her husband but since, he was not satisfied and, therefore, he started pressurizing her to bring more dowry. He used to tell her that she was of black complexion and was ugly looking. He started torturing her and ulti mately, in February 1997 she was driven out from her matrimonial house. It was further alleged that the opposite party again married with one Azhela Bibi. She stated that she had no means of income to maintain herself, whereas her husband had got sufficient means and landed property but had neglected to maintain her. The petitioner herein, i. e. the opposite party in the Court below, objected the prayer for grant of maintenance by stating that he has already divorced his wife by pronouncing 'Talaque' on 15-1-1998 and the written 'Talaquenama' was also handed over to her and, therefore, there was no relationship of husband and wife between them and, as such, she was not entitled to maintenance because a divorced Muslim woman is not entitled to maintenance.

(3.) Both the parties in support of their case adduced evidence. By the impugned order, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dumka held that the petitioner (the husband) failed to prove his case that he had given 'Talaque' to the opposite party (wife) and that there was no relationship of husband and wife between them. It was further held that the marriage between the parties was solemnized as per Muslim custom and rituals and they were husband and wife. It was further held that the materials on record categorically proved that the opposite parties (petitioner herein) was having sufficient means of income and the applicant/wife was residing at her parent house and the husband, i. e. the petitioner herein, failed and neglected to maintain his wife. In view of the above finding the learned Principal Judge, Dumka, allowed the application under Section 125 Cr. P. C. filed by the applicant wife and directed the husband, i. e. the petitioner herein, to pay maintenance allowance of Rs. 500/- P. M. to his wife from the date of the application, which has been challenged in this revision application.