Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Smt. Shakuntala, filed a criminal revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 10.08.2018 passed by the I-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, sitting at Jamakhandi, in Crl.A.No.2/2017, which confirmed the order dated 26.12.2016 passed by the Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Banahatti, in Crl.Misc.No.10/2013. The petitioner sought maintenance under Section 125 CrPC from her husband, Kashappa @ Kashinath Athani, and other respondents. The trial court awarded maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month to the petitioner, which was upheld by the appellate court. The petitioner contended that the quantum was inadequate and that she was entitled to higher maintenance. The respondents argued that the petitioner refused to live with her husband without justifiable cause. The High Court held that the wife's refusal to live with her husband due to his second marriage is a justifiable ground under the Explanation to Section 125(3) CrPC, and thus she is entitled to maintenance. The court found the quantum of Rs.1,000/- per month to be reasonable and declined to interfere in revision. The revision petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Section 125 CrPC - Justifiable refusal to live with husband - Second marriage - The wife refused to live with husband because he married a second wife. Held that such refusal is based on justifiable ground under Explanation to Section 125(3) CrPC, and the wife is entitled to maintenance. (Paras 5-7)
B) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Quantum - Section 125 CrPC - The trial court awarded Rs.1,000/- per month, which was confirmed by the appellate court. Held that the quantum is reasonable and does not warrant interference in revision. (Para 8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner-wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC when she refuses to live with her husband on the ground of his second marriage, and whether the quantum of maintenance awarded is proper.
Final Decision
The revision petition is dismissed. The order of the trial court awarding maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month, as confirmed by the appellate court, is upheld.
Law Points
- Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC
- Justifiable refusal to live with husband
- Second marriage as valid ground for refusal
- Quantum of maintenance
- Revision jurisdiction under Section 397 CrPC
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (01) 43
Sri S.C. Bhuti for petitioner, Sri Shivaraj P. Mudhol for respondent 1
Kashappa @ Kashinath and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision petition against order in maintenance case under Section 125 CrPC
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought to set aside the judgment/order dated 10.08.2018 in Crl.A.No.2/2017 and order dated 26.12.2016 in Crl.Misc.No.10/2013 and grant all reliefs sought in Crl.Misc.No.10/2013
Filing Reason
Petitioner claimed maintenance from her husband who married a second wife
Previous Decisions
Trial court awarded maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month; appellate court confirmed the order
Issues
Whether the wife's refusal to live with her husband due to his second marriage is a justifiable ground for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC?
Whether the quantum of maintenance awarded is adequate?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that she is entitled to maintenance as her husband married a second wife and she refused to live with him on that ground.
Respondents contended that the petitioner refused to live with her husband without any justifiable cause.
Ratio Decidendi
A wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even if she refuses to live with her husband, provided such refusal is based on a justifiable ground. The husband's second marriage constitutes a justifiable ground for the wife to refuse to live with him, as per the Explanation to Section 125(3) CrPC. The quantum of maintenance is a matter of discretion and will not be interfered with in revision unless it is grossly inadequate or perverse.
Judgment Excerpts
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent No.1.
The wife refused to live with her husband because he married a second wife. Such refusal is based on justifiable ground under Explanation to Section 125(3) CrPC.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Crl.Misc.No.10/2013 before the Civil Judge & J.M.F.C., Banahatti, seeking maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The trial court awarded maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month on 26.12.2016. The petitioner appealed in Crl.A.No.2/2017 before the I-Additional District & Sessions Judge, Bagalkot, sitting at Jamakhandi, which was dismissed on 10.08.2018. The petitioner then filed the present revision petition before the High Court of Karnataka, Dharwad Bench, which was dismissed on 24.01.2019.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 125, 397, 401
