Jharkhand High Court
Omprakash Thakur Alias Om Prakash ... vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors on 19 July, 2016
Author: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
Bench: Rongon Mukhopadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Rev. No. 668 of 2015
Omprakash Thakur @ Om Prakash Thakur .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Seema Devi
3. Sourav Kumar
4. Saloni Kumari ... Opposite Parties
---
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailesh, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
For O.P. No. 2 to 4 : Mr. P. K. Verma, Advocate
Order No. 06 Dated 19th July 2016
Heard Mr. Shailesh, Learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. P. K. Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party Nos. 2 to 4.
This application is directed against the order dated 04.04.2015 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bokaro in M. P. Case No. 35 of 2013, whereby the petition filed u/s 125 Cr.P.C. by the opposite party No. 2 has been allowed and the petitioner has been directed to pay monthly maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- per month in total to the opposite party Nos. 2 to 4.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was absolutely no reason on the part of the opposite party No. 2 to leave her matrimonial home. It has further been submitted that even before the Family Court, the petitioner had shown his willingness to keep the opposite party No. 2 along with children with full dignity and honour. Learned counsel has further reiterated his stand with respect to keeping the opposite party No. 2 with him. It has also been submitted that non-consideration has been made about the income of the petitioner and in fact the petitioner is earning a very meagre amount and as such the maintenance has been awarded on a higher side.
Mr. P. K. Verma, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties No. 2 to 4 has submitted that opposite party No. 2 is not willing to stay with the petitioner, as the petitioner has remarried. It has also been submitted that considering means of income of the petitioner, the learned court below is justified in awarding a total maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- per month to the opposite party Nos. 2 to 4.
2.It appears that the petitioner has solemnized another marriage and the opposite party No. 2 has refused to accept the offer made by the petitioner with respect to taking her back and keeping her with full dignity and honour. Learned court below has considered the entire facets of the case and has awarded maintenance of Rs. 4,000/- per month in total to the opposite party Nos. 2 to 4 which in my considered opinion does not necessitate any interference.
Accordingly, there being no merit in this application, the same is dismissed.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J) MK