Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Harischandra Bhanudas Lande, filed a writ petition challenging the orders of the Judicial Magistrate, Shevgaon, and the Revisional Court granting monthly maintenance of Rs.200 to his wife, Ranjana (respondent no.2), under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The marriage was solemnized about five years before the wife filed the maintenance application. After the birth of their first son, the wife was subjected to ill-treatment on the ground of her dark complexion and the husband's desire to remarry. Despite this, she continued cohabitation and gave birth to a second son. However, after one year, the husband ceased cohabitation and neglected to maintain her. The wife filed Cri.Misc.Application No.80/1994 seeking maintenance of Rs.500 per month for herself and her minor son. The Magistrate, after considering evidence, granted Rs.200 per month to the wife and Rs.100 to the son. The husband's revision was dismissed by the Sessions Court. In the writ petition, the husband argued that the wife was capable of earning and that there was no neglect. The High Court, per V.M. Deshpande J., dismissed the petition, holding that the wife's ability to earn does not disentitle her to maintenance unless the husband proves she is able to maintain herself. The courts below had correctly appreciated the evidence and found that the wife was unable to maintain herself and that the husband had neglected her. The petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Section 125 CrPC - Wife's Earning Capacity - The court held that the wife's ability to earn does not automatically disentitle her to maintenance; the husband must prove that she is able to maintain herself. The Magistrate and Revisional Court correctly granted maintenance based on evidence of neglect and inability to maintain. (Paras 1-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the courts below erred in granting maintenance to the wife under Section 125 CrPC despite her alleged ability to earn and the husband's claim of no neglect.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the maintenance orders of the courts below. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC
- Wife's earning capacity
- Burden of proof on husband
- Neglect to maintain
Case Details
2014 LawText (BOM) (06) 11
Criminal Writ Petition No. 233 of 2001
Mr. L.B. Pallod, Mr. D.B. Bhange, Mr. D.R. Jaybhar
Harischandra Bhanudas Lande
The State of Maharashtra, Ranjana Harischandra Lande, Sharad Harischandra Lande
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging maintenance order under Section 125 CrPC
Remedy Sought
Petitioner husband sought to quash the maintenance order granted to his wife and minor son
Filing Reason
Husband alleged that the Magistrate and Revisional Court erred in granting maintenance as wife was capable of earning and there was no neglect
Previous Decisions
Judicial Magistrate, Shevgaon granted maintenance of Rs.200 per month to wife and Rs.100 to son vide order dated 19-12-1997 in Cri.Misc.Appln.No.80/1994; Revisional Court confirmed the order on 24-04-2001 in Cri.Revn.Application No.11/1998
Issues
Whether the courts below erred in granting maintenance to the wife under Section 125 CrPC despite her alleged ability to earn?
Whether the husband proved that the wife was able to maintain herself and that there was no neglect?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the wife is capable of earning and there was no neglect to maintain.
Respondents argued that the wife was ill-treated and neglected, and unable to maintain herself.
Ratio Decidendi
The wife's ability to earn does not automatically disentitle her to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC; the husband must prove that she is able to maintain herself. The courts below correctly found that the wife was unable to maintain herself and that the husband had neglected her.
Judgment Excerpts
According to him, the learned Judicial Magistrate, [F.C.], Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar committed serious mistake in law in granting monthly maintenance allowance @ Rs.200/- in favour of his wife [ Resp.No.2 ] vide Judgment and Order dated 19th December, 1997 passed in Cri.Misc.Appln.No.80/1994 and according to the husband, the learned Revisional Court further erred in confirming the said Judgment and Order, granting maintenance in favour of the wife, by his Judgment and Order dated 24th April, 2001, passed in Cri. Revn. Application No.11/1998.
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 were constrained to institute proceedings U/Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, [F.C.], Shevgaon, Dist. Ahmednagar, since they were refused and neglected to maintain by the present petitioner and since they were unable to maintain themselves.
Procedural History
Wife filed maintenance application under Section 125 CrPC in 1994 before Judicial Magistrate, Shevgaon. Magistrate granted maintenance on 19-12-1997. Husband filed revision before Sessions Court, which was dismissed on 24-04-2001. Husband then filed the present writ petition in 2001, which was dismissed on 25-06-2014.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 125
