JHARKHAND HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER FOR SUNIL PRAKASH V/S THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANR.

RANCHI, India, Oct. 7 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Sept. 8:

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is confining his prayer to the order dated 17.10.2023 in the present criminal revision and he is not pressing other orders under challenge in the present petition and he submits in view of that, this petition may kindly be heard considering the order dated 17.10.2023.

2. Learned counsel for the State submits that it is upon the Court to decide the same in absence of the order dated 04.03.2024.

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent State.

4. This petition has been preferred against the order dated 17.10.2023 passed in Original Maintenance Case No.221 of 2022 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ranchi, whereby the petition filed under section 125 Cr.PC by the O.P.No.2 has been allowed by the learned court.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in light of sub section 5 of section 125 CrPC the OP No.2 is not entitled for maintenance as she is earning herself and in view of that the learned court has wrongly passed the said order. On these grounds, he submits that the order may kindly be set aside.

6. Learned counsel for the State submits that not even a single chit of paper was produced before the learned court and the learned court by way of interim maintenance has passed the said order and has directed to pay Rs.8000/- per month to the O.P.No.2.

7. So far as sub section 5 of section 125 CrPC is concerned, it is required to be proved before the learned court that wife is living in adultery or without any sufficient reason she has refused to live in matrimonial house and they are residing separately by way of mutual consent and if these conditions are fulfilled then only sub section 5 of section 125 CrPC will apply and onus lies upon the petitioner to show these ingredients to apply sub section 5 of section 125 CrPC.

8. From the impugned order, it transpires that petitioner has not been able to bring on record any chit of paper to suggest that OP No.2 is earning Rs.40,000/- and even no prescription was brought on record before the learned court of any mental disorder of OP No.2. The order is interim in nature and only Rs.8,000/- per month is allowed to be paid to the OP No.2 and petitioner happened to be government employee holding post of BDO in Government of Jharkhand. The petitioner, being husband, is bound to maintain his wife and the petitioner has not been able to prove so far as the conditions made in sub section 5 of section 125 CrPC is concerned and the order is interim in nature and the Court finds that there is no illegality in the impugned order. As such, this petition is dismissed.

9. Pending petition if any also stands disposed of accordingly.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.