Patna High CourtCR. REV./204/2024dismissed

Shatrudhan Singh v. Renu Kumari

2024-07-24Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Chandel3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.204 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Shatrudhan Singh Son of Awadhesh Singh @ Awadhesh Kumar Singh Resident of Mardan Bigha, Post- Pariyari, P.S.- Kinjar, District- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

Renu Kumari Wife of Shatrudhan Singh Resident of Mardan Bigha, PostPariyari, P.S.- Kinjar, District- Arwal, Present D/o Shiv Prasad Singh, VillageDoriper, P.S.- Masaurhi, District- Patna ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 24-07-2024 Heard on admission.

2. This revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner-husband of the opposite party being aggrieved with the order dated 15.01.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jehanabad in Maintenance Case No. 53 of 2018 whereby and whereunder the learned Family Court while allowing the application filed under Section 125 of Cr. P.C. directed the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance amount of Rs. 3000/- to opposite party, wife and Rs. 2,000/- to their minor daughter namely, Khushi Kumari.

3. Undisputedly, the opposite party is a legally wedded wife of the petitioner and out of their wedlock, Khushi

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.204 of 2024(3) dt.24-07-2024 2/3 Kumari was born. There is also notice to the point that both opposite party-wife and her minor daughter are residing separately.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that without being any sufficient cause, the opposite party-wife is residing separately. Therefore, on this ground only, she is not entitled to get any maintenance.

5. Bare perusal of the impugned order particularly paragraph no. 6 clearly shows that in paragraph no. 12 of his written statement, the petitioner himself admitted the fact that he performed second marriage with another lady. Thus, there is sufficient cause available to the opposite party-wife to reside separately with petitioner. Therefore, the finding recorded by the learned Family Court in this regard is in accordance with the evidence available on record.

6. So far as the quantum of amount of maintenance is concerned, perusal of paragraph no. 16 of the impugned order further shows that the witness of this petitioner Ram Niwash Singh, O.P. witness no.1of the maintenance case, admitted the fact that petitioner is having landed property and house both at Village Bara and Mardan Bigha. He further admitted the fact that petitioner herein is also doing the work of teacher in a

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.204 of 2024(3) dt.24-07-2024 3/3 private school and from there he is also getting salary.

7. Considering the above the amount of maintenance of Rs. 5,000/- directed to be paid by the learned Family Court is also appears to be just and proper.

8. Resultantly, I do not find any merit in the revision petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed at the stage of admission itself.

(Arvind Singh Chandel , J) shailendra/- U T