SHIV SHANKAR KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.03.2015 passed in M.P. No. 19 of 2013 by which the petitioner-husband has been directed to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to his wife.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent-wife is in the habit of filing false criminal case against her husband only to harass and make him obedient to her dictate. The learned counsel submits that previously a case under section 498A IPC was filed by the petitioner's wife which has been dismissed and it has come on record that the respondent-wife has left the company of the petitioner without any just excuse. He has further submitted that the respondent-wife is working somewhere in a Mall at Bokaro.

(3.) The proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C is summary in nature. It is a beneficial provision and, therefore, the mandate of the provision under section 125 Cr.P.C cannot be frustrated on mere technical objection. The stand taken by the petitioner-husband that his wife is working in a Mall at Bokaro, least to say, is vague. It has come on record that criminal cases alleging harassment and torture by her husband were filed by the respondent-wife. On dismissal of a case filed under section 498A IPC it cannot be inferred that the respondent-wife has no reasonable excuse to leave the company of her husband. There is specific allegation of harassment and torture when the respondent-wife was pregnant.