High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRR(F)/342/2023dismissed

Sonu v. Mausam And Another

2024-10-046 pages

! ! "#$#%&

$ %

" & ' ) * #

+ ,& '

, -& '

! '

/ #(

!#* %*!

, '

, # ,

2*& !

,0 3" -" &

+"/0

# " / * 4&

5 #

, & 67 " ( 89 : (,0&

( ,,*

! * / +

$ + ,! 4 ;

+,-&

$ + / #

$+ ( + ,0 "

( !

,0& +" !

#"0 ,,0 " #

(, ,", <,

,0& ; =&

* ! , /

# - -

> ,

"/ &

/,+

,- ( , * # !

? *,

! &

, 7&

? ! ( !

# 0

,,!

5 #

! ' "&

/,+

, ,

# /!

, 0 4&

5 +"

, #

",(

$ , !

,0 *

# +

(

4 @ " , ,

( #

/, & it transpires that respondent No. 1-wife has been granted a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month and respondents No. 2 has been granted Rs. 5,000/- each as maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. vide impugned %*!

; /%

## /"

* 0

( , ! *

(, / , !

/ -

+ #

# "

# ?

# *& +"

, /

,* ,

# #0

+!& "

( !

# #

( %

+!& "

, # & +"

( ,,

, +# '

, 4 ( '

, 6

A 7

"2* :"

@9/,

# -

"*"

: # (,,+

" # $

% #

" "

# #

" #

# "

$ 6 ' /%

,* , *"

##,

# # * !*

"5"

",(5"

!,(& " ((

(

((

((,

# There is a general tendency on the part of the wife to amplify her needs and the husband to conceal his actual income, making it difficult to determine the earning capacity of the rival claimants with exactitude. The rival claimants must scrupulously bring on record their actual respective earning capacities in order for the Court to arrive at quantum of maintenance which is just and fair in terms of principle of equistatus. The quantum of maintenance must be justifiable and realistic to provide succour to the dependent spouse and also to avoid occurrence of the two extremes of the maintenance being either paltry or extravagant, ensuring that neither of the two is reduced to a life of penury. The adequacy of the maintenance allowance has to be determined by the yardstick of the dependent spouse being able to lead a life of reasonable comfort.

, ,

+ 2* /"

@9/,

Rajnesh vs. Neha and another (2021) 2 SCC 324& +

? !

(,,+

! !

" #$ % &

""#$ %

(

! )

!) ()*!)%

+, %

+-%

). & /0

! ! !()

) %

! !

(

+ !) !

( (1

& /0!! )

2 /0

+1 )!

(1 ( !

& '

(

$ '" , "3( 4 ! !)(

( (()( !

(

*!) %

+, %

+-%

!)(

) /

# ) *

!1 ! ! )(

! ! # '

) + !)( )

! %

) )

& % % 6 .!5 ! ( !

(

,+-

7 !+

! ! !)(

8 $9" : -"

;6728 $/70

28 $9 % %!)(

(' ! !)( !

)

% %!

)8 6 66 69 7<== A perusal of the record indicates that the petitioner is working as a Constable in Central Reserved Police Force. The petitioner himself has placed his salary slip for the month of September 2022 on the record which indicates that his gross salary is Rs. 48,4000/- while his net salary is Rs. 43,303/-. His salary slip for the month of August, 2022 reflects Rs. 65,986 as his gross salary while his net salary is stated to be Rs. 61,139/-. Further, this Court in Mukesh Kumar vs. Rekha Rani 2018(3) R.C.R.(Crimianl)135 has categorically held

) that a person cannot be allowed to shrug off his liability to make the requisite payment of maintenance in lieu of loans availed by him. As such, only statutory deductions are allowed to be made from the salary of the petitioner and monthly installments qua loan are not to be considered while determining quantum of maintenance. This Court is of the considered view that a careful and just balance has been drawn, keeping in view the spiralling inflation rates and high cost of living corresponding to the reasonable needs of the respondents, to arrive at the said quantum of maintenance. Learned counsel for the petitioner has been unable to indicate any perversity in the impugned judgment which could warrant interference by this Court. ' *,0&

,, ##,

( 0& " ,, # (

> B" # - *5 C5$ B" # /, C5$