Ramesh Kumar Soni @ Ramesh Soni Son Of ... vs Seema Devi Wife Of Ramesh Soni Resident ... on 29 January, 2019

[Cites 2, Cited by 1]

Jharkhand High Court

Ramesh Kumar Soni @ Ramesh Soni Son Of ... vs Seema Devi Wife Of Ramesh Soni Resident ... on 29 January, 2019

Bench: Shree Chandrashekhar

                                                1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                        Cr. Rev. No.1204 of 2016
                                     -----

Ramesh Kumar Soni @ Ramesh Soni son of Late Hanuman Soni Residents of village Ramanujganj P.O and Police Station- Ramanujganj, District-Surguja (Chatisgarh) .... Petitioner

-Versus-

Seema Devi wife of Ramesh Soni resident of village-Murgu P.O and Police Station-Sisai, District-Gumla......Opposite Party

------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kr. Chaturvedy, Adv.

                For the State               : Mr. Anjani Kr. Toppo, APP
                For the O.P                 : Ms. Sunita Kumari, Adv.

                                            -----

08/29.01.2019           The petitioner-husband is aggrieved of the order
                dated   26.05.2016     by     which      in    a   proceeding   under

section 125 Cr.P.C he has been directed to pay Rs.2500/- to his wife and Rs.1000/- 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/- per day and while so grant of maintenance to the tune of Rs.3500/- is onerous and unjustified.

3. At the outset, it needs to be recorded that the provision under section 125 Cr.P.C is a social and beneficial provision. Object behind section 125 Cr.P.C is to ensure that the spouse must maintain each other. Petitioner's wife who has instituted a proceeding under section 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/- 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 2 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.

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.) sudhir

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court