Delhi District Court
Smt. Vimesh @ Vinita vs Sh. Bhupender Singh on 22 September, 2009
1 I N THE COURT OF Ms. VEENA RANI METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE PATIALA HOUSE COURTS, NEW DELHI. CC Number:305/1 ( Date of filing 6112008) Smt. Vimesh @ Vinita .....Petitioner Vs. Sh. Bhupender Singh .....Respondent PETITION U/S 125 CR.PC ORDER
1. Through t he presen t order I shall d ispose of t he issue regarding t he ` i n ter i m ma i n tenance ' in t he presen t case.
2. The case of t he pet i t ioner is t ha t she was wedded t o t he Responden t Husband on 26022006 according to Hindu r i tes and ceremon ies and t he paren ts of t he pet i t ioner gave suf ficien t dowry, jewelar ies and Stridhan etc i n t he marr iage and t hereaf ter.
3. It is sta ted t ha t on t he nex t day of t he marriage when pet i t ioner wen t to her paren ta l home as per customs and when she was ready to go to her ma t r i mon ial home t hen t he pe t i t ioner made a call t o t he responden t to take her to ma t r i monial house , t he responden t had refused t he pet i t ioner t o t ake her back a t her ma t r i mon ial home. It is sta ted t ha t Page 1 of 8 2 such k ind of behav iour of t he responden t caused i mmense men ta l tor t ure, pa i n, agony, suf fering and set back to t he pe t i t ioner.
4. It is fur ther sta ted t ha t af ter t hree days pet i t ioner again made a te l ephonic call at her ma t r i mon i al home and call was received by her fa t her in law who did no t g i ve any sat isfac tory rep l y and pu t t he receiver be low which also caused i mmense men ta l tor ture, pa i n, agony, suffer i ng and set back to t he pet i t ioner.
5. It is sta ted t ha t pe t i t ioner af ter t wo days aga in made a te l ephonic call to her ma t r i mon i al home and call was rece i ved by responden t h i mse lf and on asking of t he pe ti t i oner why he is not tak i ng her to back t o ma t r i mon ial home, responden t used abusive and f il t hy language against t he pe t i tioner and had ma lign t he repu ta t i on, d i gni t y and honour of t he pet i t ioner.
6. It is averred by t he pe t i t ioner t ha t af ter 20 days when she joined her ma t r i mon ial home she found t he conduct of t he responden t and h is o ther fam i l y members t o t al l y ind if feren t and neg lec t i ng t owards her.
7. It is sta ted by t he pe t i tioner t ha t when she ws working i n t he k i tchen her Jethani Rita came t here and star ted abusing her and when pe t i t i oner ra ised t he quer ies from her Jethani , t he Jethan of t he pet i t ioner t o l d to t he pet i t ioner t ha t she (Jethan i Rita) is t he real and ac t ua l w i fe of t he Page 2 of 8 3 responden t and t hrea tened t he pe t i t ioner t o t hrow ou t of t he ma t r i mon ial home. It is sta ted t ha t when pet i t ioner disclosed t h is fac t to t he responden t, t he responden t star ted bea t i ng t he pet i t i oner. It is fur ther sta ted t ha t t he i n laws of t he pet i t i oner a lso suppor ted t he version of her Jethani and to l d t he pe t i t i oner t ha t if she wan ts to live in t he ma t r i mon ial home t hen she w il l have to t olera te t he rela t ionship of t he responden t w i th Jethan i Rita. Petit i oner ci ted var i ous inc iden ts in wh i ch she has been harassed, given bea t i ng and hum i lia ted by t he responden t and his fam i l y members.
8. It is averred by t he pe t i t ioner t ha t responden t and his fam i l y members demanded a sum of Rs.3 lacs for purchase of car and t hrea tened t he pet i t ioner i f t he i r demand is no t fulf illed t hey w ill no t allow t he pe t i t i oner to en ter in to t he ma t r i mon ial home. It is sta ted t ha t responden t in a planned manner t hrown ou t t he pet i t ioner from t he ma t r i mon ia l home i n t he mon th of June, 2007 and since t hen she is residing w i th her paren t. It is sta ted t ha t en t i re gold and silver j ewe llar ies are in illegal cus tody of t he Rekha nanand, Rita Jethan and Kusum Jethan i.
9. It is sta ted by t he pet i t ioner t ha t responden t and his fam i l y members are t he owner of t he i mmovab le proper t y bear i ng no:1239, New Kashampura, Meenakshi Cinema Road, Hapu r, UP and t hey also owned other p l ot in Hapu r, UP. It is fur ther sta ted t ha t responden t is emp l oyed in t he of fice of Execu t i ve Enginee r, Meeru t , UP and is a governmen t servan t and get t i ng salary to t he t une of Rs.10,000/ p.m. Page 3 of 8 4 10 . It is fur t her sta ted t ha t pe t i t i oner is a house w i fe and to ta lly dependen t upon her paren ts for her basis need of food, cloth and she l ter. Petit i oner prayed t ha t responden t be direc ted t o pay Rs.5000/ p.m to t he pet i t ioner t owards her mon t h l y ma i n tenance.
11.The responden thusband has filed t he rep l y to t he pe t i t i on and has not denied t he fac t um of marr iage w i th t he pe t i t i oner. Howeve r, t he responden t has den ied all other allega t i ons l eve led by t he pet i t ioner agains t t he responden t. It is sta ted by t he responden t t ha t pe t i t i oner herself i f no t ready and w ill ing t o live w i t h t he responden t. It is sta ted t ha t pet i t ioner is qua lified and hav i ng degree of BA, MA and earn i ng Rs.15000/ per mon th from t u i t i on t o t he studen ts. Responden t has sta ted t ha t he is earning on l y Rs.4790/ p.m and work i ng as cleaner of veh icle in Depot of U.P. Governmen t.
12 . The pet i t ionerw i fe has filed t he rejo inder/rep lica tion to t he reply of t he responden thusband and has re i tera ted t he pe t i t i on.
13. I have heard t he learned counsels for t he par t ies and have also perused t he records. I have g i ven t hough t fu l considera t ion t o t he con ten t i ons of t he par t ies. As per t he salary slip of t he responden t ,for t he mon t h of May, 2009 , t he gross salary of t he responden t is shown Rs.8974/ and responden t is draw i ng ne t pay of Rs.7874 /. Aforemen t ioned salary slip of t he responden t is compu ter genera ted and signed by Works Manage r, Irriga t i on Workshop Division, Meeru t.
Page 4 of 8 514. The appl icat i on of t he prov ision of Se.125 Cr.P.C. rests on t he edif ice of ` neglec t ' v isàv is ma t r i monial ob liga t i ons. The object of t he ma i n tenance proceedings is not to punish a person for his pas t neglect, bu t to preven t vagrancy by compe lling t hose who can prov i de suppor t to t hose who are unable to suppor t t hemselves and who have a moral claim t o suppor t 1 . Sect ion 125 Cr.P.C. is a measure of social j ust ice and is specially enac ted to pro tec t women and ch ildren and fal ls w i t h i n const i t u t i onal sweep of Ar t icle 15(3) reinforced by Ar tic le 39 of t he Consti t u t i on of India, 1950. It is mean t t o achieve a socia l purpose 2 . The object is to preven t vagrancy and dest i t u t ion. It prov i des a speedy remedy for t he supply of food, cloth i ng and shel ter to t he deser ted w i fe. It g i ves ef fec t to fundamen ta l righ ts and na tura l du t i es of a man t o ma i n ta i n h is w i fe, children and paren ts when t hey are unab le to ma i n ta i n t hemselves. 3 15 . The asser t i ons made by each of t he par t i es are con t en t i ous and could only be decided a f t er cogen t ev i dence is produced .
16. A j udgmen t en t i t l ed "Tarak Shaw v. M i n to Shaw" (Ca lcu t t a high Cour t ) repor t ed as 198 4 CRI . L. J. 206 cit a t ion has been cited on beha l f of t he pe t i t i one rw i f e wh ich says t ha t me re l y because t he husband was adjudica ted insolven t under prov isions of t he Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, he would not be absolved of his liab ilit y under S.125, Cr.P.C. t o ma i n t ain h is w i fe and ch ild because under t he la t ter provision of law, no t only his v isib le income bu t also h is capacity t o work 1 #################################### ######################## # ################################ ###################################### ######## # # ######### # ######## # ####### # ## # ##### # ## # ####### # ### # #### # ##### # ### ####### ###### Page 5 of 8 6 and earn a salary were re levan t. Therefore, un l ess he fur ther establ ished t ha t for wha t ever reason he had no means or capaci t y to work and earn a salary and tha t he had not w il lfu lly neglec ted to suppor t t hem, he could be proceeded against under t he said S.125, Cr.P.C. In t he said case t he husband had go t himself declared as i nsolven t on h is appl icat i on and sough t from t he Insolvency Cour t an order of pro tec t ion under S.25, Presidency Towns Insolvency Act aga inst h is w i fe 's ma i n tenance app licat ion under S.125, Cr.P.C.
17. In a recen t judgmen t en t i t l ed ########### # ## # ## # # # #### # # #### # ## # ## #### # ### # # ## # ## # ### # # ### t he quest i on of adequa te and suf ficien t emp l oymen t of the w i fe, as the cla i m i ng par t y, has been deal t w i t h and t he Hon'b le Supreme Cour t held : ################################### ### # ######### # ## # ######## # ##### # ### # ###### # ## # ### # ####### # ## # ######## ################ #### ################ # ###### # ######## ############ # ####### ############################## ########################################### ######################################################################### ##############
18. In Ramesh Chander Kaushal v. M rs . Veena Kaushal and o the rs , AIR 1978 SC 1807 i t was observed t hus: ##### ######### ## # ####### ## ###### ####### ### ######### ####### ## ####### ##### ### ######## ### ##### ###### ### ############## ##### ## ####### ##### ########## ## ####### ### ## #### ## ##### #### ######## ## ######## ####### ### ############# ## ###### ### ### ######### ##### ### ####### ##### #### ###### ######### ## ######## ### ######## ######## ## ### ############## ####### ### ### ###### ######## #### ##### ### ######## #### ###### ############## ## ## ### ## #### ###### ########## ## ####### ## ## ######## ## ## ######### ## ####### ### #### ############## ### ## ### ############ ##### ######## Page 6 of 8 7 ### ##### # ### ##### ## ### ###########
19. The Law Comm ission of I nd i a in i ts 132 nd repor t had observed t ha t for a f air and a j us t de t e r m i na t i on of t he amoun t of ma i n t enance ( to t he w i f e ) no t on ly t he mon t h l y income of t he husband bu t a lso a l l h is o t her resources ex ist i ng may be t aken in to accoun t . I n t he said repor t i t was r ei t era t ed t ha t i n India t he econom i c i ndependence of t he w i fe is st ill a rari ty. The l aw comm ission wh i le quo t i ng Bai Tahra 's case (1979 Cr. L. J. 151) observed t ha t Ar t icle 15 has compe lling compassiona te re levance i n t he con tex t of S.125 of Cr.P.C. and t he benefi tofdoub t i f any i n sta t u tory in terpre ta t i on belongs to t he w i fe. Protec tion aga inst mo ra l ma ter ia l abandonmen t mani fest i n Ar t.39, is par t of social and econom i c j ust ice specified i n Ar t icle 38, fulf ill men t of wh ich is fundamen t al to t he governance of coun try. (Ar t icle 37). The law Comm ission also had dif feren t i a ted t he ` po ten t ia lit y t o earn ' from unable t o ma i n ta i n herself ' w i t h respect t o t he w i fe.
20. In t he presen t case af ter assessing t he prov ision (being woman orien ted) and af ter go ing t hrough t he var ious j udgmen ts of t he Hon ' b l e Supreme Cour t I f i nd t ha t t he plea of t he woman is to be p laced h i gher. I also need to rem i nd myself t ha t S.125 of t he Cr.P.C. is social legisla t ion. Therefore I am at t h is stage not hesi tan t t ha t a pr i ma facie case exists for an in terim ma i n tenance. The me ri ts of t he case howeve r, need cogen t ev i dence.
21. In view of t he fac ts & circums tances of t he case and t he judgmen ts quo ted I have conc luded t ha t t he w i fe deserves i n ter i m ma i n tenance a t Page 7 of 8 8 t h is stage. According l y I gran t t he pet i t ionerw i fe a ma i n tenance of Rs.2,700/ ( Two t housand seven hundred) per mon t h from t he da te of filing of app lica tion t i ll t he final disposal of t he presen t case. The responden t is d i rec ted to clear t he arrears w i th i n t hree mon t hs from t he da te of order. Howeve r, no th i ng con ta ined here in shall tan t amoun t to any expression on t he mer i t of t he case.
Put up for PE on 30112009.
Announced i n t he open cour t on t h is 22 nd day of Septembe r, 2009.
# ##### #### # ############ ########### ##### ##### # ####### ##### ####### ### ##### Page 8 of 8