Dewanand Sahu v. Smt. Ganga Bai
This judgment came from a scanned document and its text layer is unreliable — words may be garbled. Check the original PDF before relying on any passage.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTESGARH AT BILASPUR
CRIMINALREVISION N0. "}^S'OF2013 ssiaais APPLICANT (Non-Applicant) Dewanand Sahu S/o shri Govind Sahu, aged about 50 years,by caste-teli R/o.
at post Shyamtarai Thana & \^:
^..{•K'
..^•'•c'TD^.^ 0^><'^-:-%.- .***'*- .
^ t'^1'*1^ »&"•a'^'*'
Tahsil-Dhamatari, Civil & Revenue Dist.
Dhamatari ^'
(C.G.)
VERSUS
RESPONDENT Smt.
Sanga Bai Sahu W/o.
Shri Dewanand, aged about 45 years, R/o.
Shyamtarai, Thana & Tahsil-bhamatari, Civil & Revenue, District Ohamatari (C.6.) '• \ REVISION UNDER SECTCON 19 (4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1984. REA& WITH SECTEON 397 <& 401 OF THE CO&E OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE1973, ^ Being aggrieved by the order dated 28.09.2013 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court Dhamatari, District &bamatari, (Presided over by smt. Meenakshi Gondale) in ,<fcase no. 0872013, whereby the leamed family Court has allowed application under section of criminal procedure code. Copy of order dated 28.09.2013 is being ^S*fc^&&-£&S£i^.^BE^L^S-^Sa"^=H^SwfiBif,45S^^^is£&;TTi-A^£ S^gJfc^^cE?
>.
filed herewith as Annexure A-l.
Hence applicant prefers this memorandum of revision on the following facts and grounds.
^l HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Single Bench :
Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sain Koshy Criminal Revision No. 725 of 2013 Applicant Dewanand Sahu
VERSUS
Non-aDnlicant Smt. Ganga Bai r>^.- Shri R. S. Patel, counsel for the applicant.
None for the non-applicant.
CRIMINAL REVISION UNDER SECTION 19 (4) OF THE FAMILY COURTS ACT 1984 O R D ER (31.01.2014) By way of the instant revision, the applicant has challenged order dated 28.09.2013 passed by Family Court Dhamtari in Misc. Case No. 08/2013 .vhereby the leamed Family Judge allowing the application Bled by the applicant under Section 125 of the Code of CriminaJ Procedure has granted maintenance ofRs.700 per month to the non-applicant. 2.
The sole contention of the counsel for the applicant is that the Family Court ought to have considered the fact that the nonapplicant had left the matrimonial house almost 24 years back and fhat if the non-applicant could sustain herself for 24 years, there is no need of any amount towards maintenance. In support of his contention counsel for the applicant has placed his reliance upon the decision of this Court in the matter of Shiv Kumar Yadav Vs. Smt. Santhoshi Yadav, 2004 L.T. (C.G.).
-z3.
On going through the contents of the judgment passed by fhe Court below, the admitted fact which has come on record is that the applicant has married another lady and from the said alleged second marriage he has also three children.
The applicant has contended that since the non-applicant after leaving the raatrimonial house did not retum back for a long time, he was left with no other option but to mariy a second lady as is evident from Paragraph-4 of the finding of the trial Court. 4.
Furfher, the facts of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Yadav (supra) is entirely different from that of this case because in the said case Ending of this Court was that the husband has been able to establish the fact that the wife is residing separately without any reason whereas in the instant case there are sufGcient evidence against the applicant. In the instant case, the applicant is residing with a second lady and there are also three children born to them and this fact by it self is sufficient for any lady to leave her matrimonial house. Only for fhe reason that she had not claimed any maintenance from her husband for the past so many years by itself will not be a good ground for denying the non-applicant the maintenance. Moreover, the applicant had never taken any legal renaedy for direction against the non-applicant for staying with him by moving appropriate application for restitution of conjugal rights etc.~- 5.
In view of the same in my opin^-cn the finding arrived at by the Court below is just, legal and proper and the judgmeiit
. ;A B -spassed by this Court in the case of Shiv Kumar (Supra) would not be applicable in fhe instant case.
6.
Consequently, the revision being devoid of any substance is liable to be dismissed and it is dismissed as such. Sd/- P. Sam Kosfay Judge