Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt.Kanta & Anr vs Santosh Kumar on 4 October, 2017
Author: Sandeep Mehta
Bench: Sandeep Mehta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Revision No. 345 / 2015
1. Smt.Kanta w/o Shri Santosh Kumar, d/o Mewa Ram, aged
about 33 years,
2. Master Ankit s/o Santosh Kumar, aged about 15 years,
(through his Natural Guadian Mother Smt. Kanta)
By caste Prajapat Kumhar, r/o Sitawat, Tehsil Parbatsir,
District Nagaur, Rajasthan.
----Petitioners
Versus
Santosh Kumar s/o Shri Ramchandra, by caste Prajapati, r/o
Sanwatsir, Tehsil Kishangarh, District Ajmer, Rajasthan.
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Kuldeep Mathur, Mr. Abhishek Sharma.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Bhati, PP.
Mohd. Aslam.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA
Judgment 04/10/2017 By way of this revision, the petitioners Smt. Kanta and Ankit have approached this Court for challenging the order dated 03.12.2014 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Merta, District Nagaur in Criminal Regular (Maintenance) Case No.117/2013 (21/2009) whereby, the application preferred by the petitioners under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was partly allowed and the petitioner No.2 Ankit being son of the respondent Santosh Kumar was awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per month from the date of filing application till the date of attaining majority and simultaneously, the claim of maintenance laid on behalf of petitioner No.1 Smt. Kanta was turned down.
(2 of 3) [CRLR-345/2015] I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned order as well as the record.
Ex-facie, I am of the opinion that the Family Court was perfectly justified in rejecting the claim of the petitioner No.1 for maintenance in view of the fact that ample evidence brought on record of the case to prove that she was living in adultry. The respondent, proved an inland letter written by the petitioner Smt. Kanta to her father-in-law Ramchandra in which, she categorically stated that she eloped with a Muslim boy of her own free will and that she was not fit to live with the family of Ramchandra. The letter was placed on record of the inquiry. When a suggestion was given to Smt. Kanta regarding the said letter, she admitted that she wrote the letter to Shri Ramchandra who himself appeared in evidence and proved the letter. On going through the letter, the perverted attitude of the lady is manifest. She clearly wrote to her own father-in-law that she had eloped with a Muslim man and that the family should be prepared for divorce proceedings. She also mentioned that Ramchandra may advise his wife to satisfy her carving from her son i.e. respondent herein (indicating that the mother and son should indulge in incest). After comparing the handwriting, the trial court held and rightly so that the letter written by none other than Smt. Kanta and it gave ample proof of her adulterous and perverted lifestyle.
In this background and considering the perverted behaviour Smt. Kanta, the petitioner herein and the fact that she voluntarily deserted her husband, the respondent herein, and eloped with a (3 of 3) [CRLR-345/2015] Muslim man and also wrote a letter admitting this fact to her father-in-law and also considering the circumstance that the letter bears indecent slanderous suggestions that her husband should indulge in incestuous relationship with his own mother, I am of the firm opinion that the petitioner Smt. Kanta does not deserve any kind of maintenance whatsoever from respondent Santosh Kumar. The impugned order 03.12.2014 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Merta, District Nagaur ex-facie does not suffer from any illegality, irregularity or perversity whatsoever so as to require interference therein.
Consequently, the instant revision is dismissed as being devoid of merit.
Record be returned to the trial court.
(SANDEEP MEHTA),J.
Tikam/119