Nirmal Singh vs Passi

K.S. Tiwana, J. (Oral)

Nirmal Singh petitioner was married to Smt. Passi respondent in the year 1973. After the marriage, the parties continued living as husband and wife in village Mianpur, Tehsil Tarn Taran, District Amritsar. A daughter named Sukhi was born to Smt. Passi from the loans of her husband Nirmal Singh. Matrimonial relations of the parties, however, did not remain smooth. Smt. Passi in her application, under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. filed in the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tarn Taran against Nirmal Singh for claiming maintenance for herself and her daughter Sukhi, alleged that Nirmal Singh was not a man of good character and was a drunkard. He used to maltreat and level charges of adultery against her. She, along with her minor daughter Sukhi, were ultimately driven out of the house and they went to her parents. She took Panchayat on more than one occasion to Nirmal Singh petitioner to keep her as his wife in his house, but he refused.

Nirmal Singh admitted the factum of marriage and the birth of Sukhi to fassi from his loins. He refuted the allegations of Smt. Passi about the maltreatment or beatings. He stated that Smt. Passi was a woman of easy virtue and had sex relations with other people. One day when he came to his house he found Smt. Passi in a compromising position with a stranger, who later on was stated to be Surinder Singh of his village. Both were naked at that time. After that incident she left the house. In spite of these acts of immorality on her part, he was still willing to keep her as his wife and made efforts to persuade her to come to his house. He had applied for divorce which was granted ex parte in his favour. He offered that he was still willing to maintain her. He averred that he was an unskilled labourer and was not in sound financial position to maintain his wife and daughter.

The learned Sub Divisional Magistrate, Tarn Taran, after trial, found that Smt. Passi, because of her adulterous and immoral conduct was not entitled to maintenance and dismissed her claim. He, however, assessing the income of Nirmal Singh at Rs. 300/, 400/ per month, allowed maintenance to Sukhi at the rate of Rs. 60/ per month. Dissatisfied with the order of the trial Court refusing her maintenance, Smt. Passi went in revision to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. The learned revision petition and allowed maintenance to Smt. Passi at the rate of Rs. 100/ per month.

Nirmal Singh has filed this revision against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar granting maintenance to Smt. Passi and also against the order of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran granting maintenance to Sukhi.

So far as the revision of Nirmal Singh petitioner against the maintenance granted to his daughter Sukhi is concerned, it is barred by time. He did not challenge this order before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, although he had appeared in that Court to contest the revision of his wife. He had accepted the order as is reflected by his conduct in not challenging that order before any Court.

In the revision against Smt. Passi, Mr. Malkiat Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner has urged that Nirmal Singh petitioner is willing to take Smt. Passi to his house and keep her as his wife. He urges that he had made this offer before the trial Court also. The circumstances of the case very strongly indicate that Nirmal Singh petitioner was not honest in making this offer. He had levelled the allegation of immorality to his wife Smt. Passi. The evidence led by him in the Court is too scanty to be accepted. Nirmal Singh stated that when he found the door locked and became suspicious, he along with Dhanwant Singh, by scaling over the wall, went inside the house and saw his wife indulging in sex with said Surinder Singh. The evidence of Nirmal Singh and Dhanwant Singh about the adulterous conduct of Smt. Passi did not impress the learned Additional Sessions Judge and he did not accept it. I also assess that evidence in the same manner. Nirmal Singh had a lurking suspicion in his mind as is evident from his statement about the conduct of his wife. When he had surprised her and Surinder Singh, he was expected to make an effort to capture the paramour of Smt. Passi in the house with the help of his companion. Nothing of that sort was done or even attempted. No step was taken by Nirmal Singh to restrain his wife, nor was she confronted with the situation in the presence of her parents and relatives. He did not take any step against Surinder Singh. The testimony of Nirmal Singh and Dhanwant Singh does not inspire confidence and is not of the type which requires to be believed. It seems to be an evidence of convenience which was created by Nirmal Singh only to absolve himself of the legal liability of maintaining his wife.

Nirmal Singh tried to project that he had condoned the act of adultery of his wife and in spite of that was wiling to keep her in his house as his wife. This projection does not appear to be honest. He drove her out of the house. Dalip Singh Sarpanch of the village of the parents of Smt. Passi and Ajit Singh, the two independent witnesses testified to the making of their efforts to persuade Nirmal Singh to come round and resume marital relations with his wife. These witnesses who were crossexamined at sufficient length stuck to their position and their evidence was not shaken. It is corroborated by the conduct of Nirmal Singh who though claiming that he had condoned the act of adultery, had not actually done so. He went to the Civil Court, levelled allegation of adultery against Smt. Passi and applied for divorce. He initially was successful in getting an ex parte decree of divorce. Smt. Passi appeared in Court and got the ex parte order, dissolving their marriage set aside. Mr. Malkiat Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner states at the bar what the application for divorce filed by Nirmal Singh has been dismissed by the Court in default and at present there is no litigation pending in any matrimonial Court between the parties. This conduct of Nirmal Singh in rushing to the matrimonial Court with an allegation of adultery and immorality against his wife and also persistently repeating this accusation in these proceeding, shows that he was not interested to keep Smt. Passi in his house as his wife, but was only to make efforts to save himself from paying maintenance. When Smt. Passi made an offer that she was willing to go to Nirmal Singh and live in his house and perform matrimonial functions, he also tried to meet her at the same level. His officer was conditional. He stated that he was prepared to keep Smt. Passi in his house as his wife provided she abandoned the path of immorality. As noticed earlier the allegation of immorality remained unsubstantiated in the proceedings. So his conduct depicts that he persistently made efforts to avoid the payment of maintenance.

Cruelty is not limited to the physical acts of violence. There are different kinds of cruelty and mental cruelty is one of them. Unfounded baseless and false allegations of unchastity, adultery or immorality amount to cruelty if made by one spouse against the other. Such false (sic) hurt one''s selfrespect and pride. If one of the spouses makes a false rumour against the other about adultery, the neighbours, relatives, friends of the family and other people look toward the victim of such an accusation with contempt and scorn. The image of the victim of such accusation is lowered in the eyes of the persons who come in contact with him or her because of the relationship, friendship etc. It is more or less recognised now that false accusation of immorality, adultery etc. amount to legal cruelty. Nirmal Singh petitioner acted with cruelty in making such allegations against his wife, Smt. Passi.

There is ample evidence on the record provided by Dalip Singh, Ajit Singh and Kulwant Singh brother of Smt. Passi and herself that she along with her daughter, were forced out of the matrimonial house by Nirmal Singh. The efforts made by her with the help of the respectables and relatives did not meet with success as Nirmal Singh was stubborn in his unaccommodating attitude in spite of persuasions made by the Panchayat. So far as willingness of Smt. Passi is concerned. It is demonstrated by her conduct in Court when she in spite of defamatory and humiliating allegations of adultery and immorality, offered to go with her husband. There is sufficient material on the record to show that Nirmal Singh was guilty of acts of cruelty towards his wife.

There is no evidence if Nirmal Singh paid any maintenance to his wife or daughter until the period she approached the Court. Instead of providing her with any maintenance, he approached the Civil Court for dissolution of marriage by way of decree of divorce. This depicts the conduct on his part to drag her to litigation and get rid of her in any way he could possibly think of. He had been neglecting his wife and daughter and never provided any maintenance to them.

From the material on the record, as has been noticed in the earlier paragraph of this judgment, Smt. Passi respondent has successfully proved that she has been turned out of the house by her husband and he has neglected and refused to maintain her and her daughter.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner, last of all, urged that the quantum of maintenance awarded to Smt. Passi and her daughter is too high. The income of Nirmal Singh petitioner is assessed at Rs. 300/, 400/ per month by Sub Divisional Magistrate which was affirmatively accepted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge deciding the revision. According to the learned Counsel, it is a fit case in with amount of maintenance should be reduced. So far as the case of Sukhi, daughter of the parties, is concerned the matter has attained finality as Nirmal Singh petitioners did not agitate against awarding of Rs. 60/ per month as maintenance to her. If the daughter is awarded Rs. 60/, the necessities and requirements of Smt. Passi cannot be met by an amount less than Rs. 100/ in these days of inflation. The wages of unskilled labourers do not remain stationary. By inflation their wages also increase. Although no material has been provided in this Court as to assess the rate of inflation, but the assessment of income at the rate of Rs. 300/ 400/ per month, even for an unskilled manual labourer, these days, seems to be very much on the lower side. Rs. 100/ p.m. as maintenance can hardly keep the body and soul of a human being together in these days of rising prices. I, therefore, do not find any reason to reduce the amount of maintenance awarded in case. The revision is, therefore, dismissed.

Revision dismissed.