RANCHI, India, Feb. 19 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on Jan. 19:

1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 and 3.

2. This revision petition has been filed challenging the judgment dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court Ranchi in Original Maintenance Case No.354 of 2019, whereby the learned Court has been pleased to direct the petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.8,000/- per month to the opposite party No. 2 (wife) and Rs.7,000/- per month to the minor daughter, opposite party No.3 and the total amount comes to Rs.15,000/-.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the learned Court has wrongly passed the impugned order of maintenance without considering the aspect of the matter that the wife is living in adultery. He submits that this has been disclosed in the written statement and the learned Court did not give any finding on that, as such, the impugned order may kindly be set aside.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the State submits that the petitioner is the husband and he is bound to maintain the wife and children under Section 125 of the CrPC.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 & 3 opposed the prayer and submits that no argument has been made before the learned Court with regard to the adultery and in view of that, the learned Court has rightly passed the impugned order. She submits that the petitioner happened to be the husband and he is bound to maintain the wife and children.

6. In view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties the Court has gone through the documents on record.

7. In a petition, many points are being taken, however, it is for the counsel, who is appearing before the Court, to argue that aspect and prove it by way of leading the evidence, even if it is considered that the petitioner has taken that ground, however that point has not been argued before the learned Court as it has been pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No.2 & 3.

8. It has come in the order of the learned Court that the marriage between the petitioner and opposite party was solemnized way back on 10.03.2016 in accordance with the Hindu Rites and Rituals and the daughter was born out of the said wedlock on 15.07.2017. It has come in the evidence that both the parties are living separately since 13.11.2016. The witnesses have stated that the wife and her parents have made every possible effort to settle the dispute between both the parties, even they met with the employer, i.e., the learned District Judge, Deoghar, who has also convinced the opposite party, but all the efforts went in vain. The wife has also given application before the Jharkhand High Court and Mahila Aayog for settlement, but no fruitful result has come out. The witnesses have stated that the petitioner is an Assistant in Madhupur Civil Court in the district of Deoghar, Jharkhand and the petitioner herein has also admitted before the learned Court that he is posted as Assistant in the Civil Court, Madhupur. Salary slip of the petitioner was brought before the learned Court and the learned Court has found that the petitioner's salary was fixed to the tune of Rs.59,240/- and he was taking net pay to the tune of Rs.49,060/-. The father of the petitioner is also a retired employee and he is also getting pension of Rs.33,000/- and the learned Court has found that there is no other liability apart from his children and wife. In these backgrounds, the learned Court has been pleased to pass the maintenance amount to the tune of Rs.8,000/- per month to his wife and Rs.7,000/- to child per month respectively in favor of opposite party No. 2 & 3.

9. In view of the above, there is no illegality in the impugned order and as such, this revision petition is dismissed. Pending petitions, if any also stands disposed of.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.