IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 03RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.6675/2013 Between:
Smt.Kamala, W/o Gunda Rao, 21 years, R/o Ganedal Village, Shimoga Taluk and District – 577201. … Petitioner (By Sri U.Panduranga Nayak, Advocate) And:
Gunda Rao, S/o Davulgude, 29 years, R/o Bellegere Village, Bhadravathi Taluk – 577301. ...Respondent (By Sri.B.S.Prasad, Advocate) This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to set aside the judgment and dated 12.07.2013 passed in Crl.RP No.146/2012 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shivamogga and in confirming the judgment dated 04.06.2010 passed by the JMFC-II Court, Shivamogga in C.Misc No.864/2009 dismissing the maintenance claim filed under Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code and allow the maintenance claim as against the respondent.
This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the Court made the following:
O R D E R Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the records.
2. The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C against the concurrent findings of the Court below dismissing the application filed by her under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.
3. The petitioner claiming to be the legally wedded wife of the respondent sought maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month on the ground that the respondent has willfully neglected to maintain her in spite of having sufficient means and capacity to pay maintenance as claimed by her before the trial Court.
4. The petitioner examined herself as P.W.1 and relied on exhibits P.1 to P.3. In rebuttal, the respondent examined himself as R.W.1 and relied on four documents. Considering the above materials, the learned Magistrate was of the view that the petitioner herself has withdrawn from the company of the respondent. Further, the learned Magistrate has observed that the children were in the care and custody of the respondent himself and the allegations made by the petitioner that the respondent-husband was having illicit relationship with one Aklamma has not been substantiated by any cogent and convincing evidence.
5. Even the Revisional Court has held that all the three children were in the care and custody of the respondent and that the petitioner on her own volition went to her parental house. Both the courts below have taken note of the suggestions made by the counsel for the petitioner to R.W.1 that he has wedded other lady, who is other than the aforesaid lady Smt.Aklamma. Apart from failing to prove the alleged illicit relationship with Aklamma, the very suggestion made on behalf of the petitioner suggesting that he has contracted 2nd marriage with another lady suggests that the petitioner had come up with false and baseless allegations against the respondent solely with a view to claim maintenance. However, during the course of the trial, it has been proved that the petitioner herself had left the company of the respondent without any justifiable reason. The children were in the care and custody of the petitioner. The contentions urged by the petitioner are proved to be false and both the courts below have recorded the finding of facts, based on the above evidence. I do not find any error or infirmity whatsoever either in the findings recorded by the Court below or in the appreciation of the evidence denying maintenance to the petitioner. This is not a fit case for admission. Hence, the petition is dismissed.
This order shall not preclude the petitioner from claiming maintenance from the respondent on account of any changed circumstances.
SD/-
JUDGE NBM/KG