Murugan v. Prema

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 25.03.2025 Coram:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN and Crl.M.P.No.4874 of 2024 --- Murugan, S/o Ponnusamy .. Petitioner Vs.

1. Prema, W/o Murugan

2. Priyadharshini, D/o Murugan .. Respondents Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 08.02.2024 passed in M.C.No.11 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court, Cuddalore. For petitioner : Mr.E.V.Chandru @ E.Chandrasekaran For respondents: No appearance 1 / 5

ORDER

None appears on behalf of the respondents and the name of the learned counsel who had entered for the respondents, have also been printed in the cause list.

2. The husband has filed the present revision petition challenging the order dated 08.02.2024 passed in M.C.No.11 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court, Cuddalore.

3. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner/husband submitted that the revision petitioner is only employed in the office of the learned counsel and serving in the office as an Helper only from 16.03.2024 and getting Rs.6,000/- as salary, whereas, the first respondent is working as an Office Assistant and she is employed and the second respondent is a B.E. graduate and is able to maintain herself. Further, pending the maintenance case, the second respondent got married and this fact is not brought to the notice of the Family Court. Since both the respondents are able to maintain themselves, they are not entitled for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 2 / 5

4. The relationship between the parties is admitted. The first respondent is a working woman. The second respondent is a B.E. graduate and however, there is no proof to show that she was employed, but however, she got married. Therefore, she is entitled to get the maintenance amount till she got married.

5. As far the first respondent is concerned, since she is employed and she is a woman of means, and the records show that she is getting Rs.25,000/- as salary, and she is able to maintain herself. In this case, admittedly, the first respondent is gainfully employed and getting salary more than the revision petitioner/husband. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the Family Court granting maintenance to the first respondent is hereby set aside.

6. As far as the second respondent is concerned, the maintenance granted is confirmed and it is only informed that the second respondent has got married and therefore, she is entitled to maintenance till her marriage and not subsequently. It is stated that she is entitled for maintenance till February 2023 only and the same is hereby recorded.

7. With the above observations and modification in the maintenance 3 / 5

amount to the second respondent till she got married prior to the passing of the impugned order of maintenance pending this revision petition, i.e. till February--2023, this revision petition is partly allowed. Consequently, Crl.M.P.No.4874 of 2024 is closed.

25.03.2025 cs To

1. The Judge, Family Court, Cuddalore.

2. The Section Officer, Criminal Section Records, High Court, Madras. 4 / 5

P.VELMURUGAN, J cs 25.03.2025 5 / 5