RAMESH KUMAR SONI Vs. SEEMA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-husband is aggrieved of the order dtd. 26/5/2016 by which in a proceeding under sec. 125 Cr.P.C he has been directed to pay Rs.2500.00 to his wife and Rs.1000.00 to his minor son as maintenance.

(2.) Stand taken by the petitioner is that he does not have sufficient source of income and he is earning only Rs.200.00 per day and while so grant of maintenance to the tune of Rs.3500.00 is onerous and unjustified.

(3.) At the outset, it needs to be recorded that the provision under sec. 125 Cr.P.C is a social and beneficial provision. Object behind sec. 125 Cr.P.C is to ensure that the spouse must maintain each other. Petitioner's wife who has instituted a proceeding under sec. 125 Cr.P.C has alleged that the petitioner has married another lady and he has neglected her and their minor children. Although this fact has been denied by the petitioner, who is a lawyer by profession, it needs to be indicated that the stand of his wife is that his monthly income is Rs.35000.00 per month from profession and business of a shop which he owns. The Family Court judge has granted maintenance by calculating daily-wages as notified by the Labour Department, Government of Jharkhand. Considering the limitations under the revisional jurisdiction [refer,"Sheonandan Paswan Vs. State of Bihar and Ors." reported in (1987) 1 SCC 288], in the above facts, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter and accordingly, Cr. Revision No.1204 of 2016 is dismissed.