Rajender Singh Guleria vs Champa Devi, Kumari Tanuja Guleria and Kumari Pravina Guleria; Respondent No. 3 through her mother and natural guardian i.e. petitioner No. 1 Smt. Champa Devi

Kuldip Singh, Judge

This petition has been filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 12.10.2011 passed by Sessions Judge, Kullu, in Criminal Revision No. 10 of 2011, affirming order dated 14.12.2010 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, in Cr.M.A. No. 315-iv/2008. The facts, in brief, are that respondents had filed a petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C. against petitioner claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 15,000/- each per month. The respondent No. 1 alleged that she is legally wedded wife of petitioner and respondents No. 2 and 3 are their children from the wedlock. It has been alleged that petitioner some time after the marriage started consuming liquor and torturing respondent No. 1 for dowry.

The petitioner neglected respondents from maintenance. The petitioner ousted the respondent No. 1 from her matrimonial home. The respondent No. 1 started a small shop in order to meet her demands and education of the children. It has been stated that petitioner is having an apple orchard over 5-10 bighas of land and his income from the orchard is about Rs. 10,00,000/- per year. The petitioner has sufficient means to maintain the respondents, but despite that petitioner has refused to maintain the respondents.

The petitioner contested the petition and has taken the plea that he is suffering from chronic psychiatric disorder and undergoing regular treatment. He is not in a position to earn his livelihood. The expenses of treatment of petitioner are being borne by his brother. The respondent No. 1 has left him during illness. He has prayed for dismissal of the petition.

The respondent No. 1 examined herself and supported her case. The petitioner appeared in the witness box and has stated that he is suffering from mental ailment. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after appreciation of evidence on record has allowed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month to each of the respondents from the date of filing of the petition. The order dated 14.12.2010 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate has been affirmed by learned Sessions Judge on 12.10.2011.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is suffering from psychiatric disorder and he is not in a position to earn anything. The two Courts below after appreciation of the evidence have recorded a finding of fact and allowed maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month to each of the respondents. It has not been pointed out that it is not a case of no evidence or maintenance order is perverse. It has not been submitted that inadmissible evidence has been considered or material evidence which goes to the root of the case has been ignored. The scope of petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is very narrow. There is no jurisdictional error in the impugned orders. The maintenance to respondents at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- per month to each respondent in the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be said to be on higher side. In view of above discussion, there is no merit in the petition. Accordingly, petition is dismissed. Cr. M.P. No. 905 of 2011 has also become infructuous in view of disposal of main petition.