Case Note & Summary
The case involves two criminal revision applications filed by Nirajkumar Kapurchand Jain against the judgment of the Family Court, Nagpur, dated 3.12.2016, which allowed maintenance petitions filed by his wife, Sweeti Jain, and minor son, Master Aryan, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Family Court directed the husband to pay Rs.7,000 per month as maintenance. The husband contended that the wife had withdrawn from his company without sufficient cause and thus was not entitled to maintenance. The High Court examined the evidence and found that the wife had alleged cruelty and demand for dowry, which the husband failed to rebut. The court held that the burden was on the husband to prove that the wife left without sufficient reason, and he did not discharge that burden. Consequently, the High Court dismissed both revision applications, upholding the Family Court's order.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Maintenance - Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Entitlement of wife and minor child - The Family Court allowed maintenance petitions of wife and minor son, directing husband to pay Rs.7,000 per month. Husband challenged on ground of desertion by wife. Held that the husband failed to prove that the wife withdrew from his company without sufficient cause; the wife's evidence of cruelty and demand for dowry was credible. (Paras 1-3)
B) Family Law - Maintenance - Burden of Proof - Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Desertion - The burden lies on the husband to show that the wife left without sufficient reason. In the absence of corroborative evidence, the wife's version prevails. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC when she has withdrawn from the husband's company, and whether the husband has proved that the wife left without sufficient reason.
Final Decision
Both criminal revision applications are dismissed. The impugned judgment of the Family Court dated 3.12.2016 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC
- Wife's right to maintenance
- Burden of proof on husband alleging desertion
- Maintenance for minor child
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (07) 188
Criminal Revision Application No.33 of 2017 and Criminal Revision Application No.34 of 2017
Shri P.U. Nandanwar for applicant, Shri Vikrant Pandey for non-applicants
Nirajkumar Kapurchand Jain
Smt. Sweeti w/o Nirajkumar Jain and Master Aryan s/o Nirajkumar Jain
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal revision applications challenging Family Court order granting maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.
Remedy Sought
Husband sought to set aside the maintenance order.
Filing Reason
Husband contended that wife withdrew from his company without sufficient cause.
Previous Decisions
Family Court, Court No.3, Nagpur allowed Petition No.E169 of 2013 and Petition No.E103 of 2014 on 3.12.2016, granting maintenance of Rs.7,000 per month to wife and minor son.
Issues
Whether the wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC when she has withdrawn from the husband's company.
Whether the husband has proved that the wife left without sufficient reason.
Submissions/Arguments
Husband's counsel argued that the wife withdrew from cohabitation without sufficient cause, thus disentitling her to maintenance.
Wife's counsel supported the Family Court's finding that the husband failed to prove desertion.
Ratio Decidendi
In a claim for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, the burden is on the husband to prove that the wife withdrew from his company without sufficient cause. If the husband fails to discharge that burden, the wife is entitled to maintenance.
Judgment Excerpts
The contention of learned counsel Shri Nandanwar for the applicant is that it is the wife who has withdrawn her cohabitation from the company of applicant and, therefore, she is not entitled for maintenance.
In the absence of any corroborative evidence, the wife's version that she was subjected to cruelty and demand for dowry is credible.
Procedural History
The wife and minor son filed maintenance petitions under Section 125 CrPC before the Family Court, Nagpur (Petition No.E169/2013 and E103/2014). The Family Court allowed the petitions on 3.12.2016. The husband filed two criminal revision applications before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the order.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 125
