Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 1 of 7 $~28 & 29 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL.REV.P. 689/2023, CRL.M.A. 16854/2023 & CRL.M.A. 35375/2023 ARVIND SINGH RANA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Darshan Paliwal, Mr. Aditya Raj, Mrs. Neeraj Paliwal and Ms. Archisha Satyarthi, Advs. with petitioner. versus NIDHI SINGH RANA
.....Respondent Through: Mr. Jai Bansal and Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advs. with respondent. 29 + CRL.REV.P. 886/2024, CRL.M.A. 20293/2024 & CRL.M.A. 20294/2024 NIDHI SINGH RANA
.....Petitioner Through: Mr. Jai Bansal and Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advs. with petitioner. versus ARVIND SINGH RANA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Kirti Uppal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Darshan Paliwal, Mr. Aditya Raj, Mrs. Neeraj Paliwal and Ms. Archisha Satyarthi, Advs. with respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN O R D E R %
23.12.2024 1. The present petitions are filed against the order dated 26.04.2023 (hereafter ‘impugned order’) passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Saket, Delhi in M No. 219/2022 titled Nidhi Singh Rana v. Arvind Singh Rana. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 2 of 7 2. By virtue of the present petitions, the petitioner/husband seeks setting aside of the impugned order whereby the petitioner/wife was awarded interim maintenance to the tune of ₹1,00,000/. The petitioner/wife, alternatively, seeks enhancement in the interim maintenance awarded to her. 3. By the impugned order, the learned Family Court, in a petition filed by the petitioner/wife under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’), assessed the monthly income of the petitioner/husband to be ₹4,00,000/- per month, and awarded a sum of ₹1,00,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the petitioner/wife from the date of filing of the application for interim maintenance till the disposal of the petition. 4. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner/husband submits that the conduct of the petitioner/wife does not entitle her to grant of any interim maintenance. He submits that the petitioner/wife left the company of the petitioner/husband of her own free will, and also alleges that the petitioner/wife has been living in adultery which attracts the bar under Section 125(4) of the CrPC. Certain WhatsApp chats have also been appended in this regard. 5. He submits that the petitioner/wife has her own independent source of income, and consequently submits that the impugned order be set aside. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife submits that the petitioner/husband is the owner of Ranson Sports Industry which is a leading manufacturer and exporter of sports goods. He submits that the petitioner/husband participates in various international business exhibitions and maintains a high standard of living. He submits that the petitioner/wife is entitled to a This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 3 of 7 similar lifestyle as she was having in her matrimonial home, and prays that the interim maintenance be enhanced. He submits that the petitioner/husband has multiple sources of income and his income is not limited to his earnings from being a partner at the Ranson Sports Industry. 7. The learned Family Court noted that the petitioner/wife had stated the reasons for leaving her matrimonial home. The learned Family Court considered the rival submissions of the parties with respect to the income of both the parties. It was noted that the petitioner/wife contended that the income of the petitioner/husband was more than ₹20,00,000/- per month, and as per the case of the petitioner/husband, he was earning merely ₹50,000/- per month. On the other hand, the petitioner/husband contended that the petitioner/wife was earning ₹1,50,000/- per month and had her own independent source of income. 8. The learned Family Court perused the ITRs filed by the petitioner/husband reflecting his income, and the documents/ photographs appended by the petitioner/wife to corroborate her contention that the petitioner/husband was earning more than ₹20,00,000/-. It was noted that from the documents/photographs, the income of the petitioner/husband can be guessed. The learned Family Court noted that undisputedly, the petitioner/husband is a partner in Ranson Sports Industry along with his parents. 9. It was noted that the petitioner/husband, in his reply, stated that he took the petitioner/wife to Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia and also on a cruise trip for their honeymoon. It was noted that the petitioner/husband, on most occasions, took the petitioner/wife to the UK when travelled for business purposes. It was noted that the petitioner/husband further took his son to various foreign trips, all of which would not be possible should This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 4 of 7 the petitioner/husband be earning merely ₹50,000/- per month. 10. The learned Family Court also took into account that while the petitioner/husband contended that the petitioner/wife possessed her independent source of income, and was earning more than ₹1,50,000/- per month, no document was filed to substantiate such claim. Considering the above, the learned Family Court assessed the income of the petitioner/husband to be ₹4,00,000/- month, and awarded a sum of ₹1,00,000/- to the petitioner/wife as interim maintenance. 11. It is trite law that a husband cannot shirk his sacrosanct duty to financially support his wife. Section 125 of the CrPC is a provision designed to provide a quick remedy to those who are unable to maintain themselves. The primary objective of this section is to prevent vagrancy and destitution by ensuring that those who are dependent on another for their subsistence, such as a wife, children, or parents, receive financial support when they are unable to maintain themselves. 12. The Supreme Court in Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai : (2008) 2 SCC 316 emphasized that the object of maintenance proceedings is not to punish a person for past neglect but to ensure that those entitled to support are not left in distress. This provision embodies the social responsibility and moral duty to maintain one's dependents. Consequently, the maintenance awarded should neither be luxurious nor penurious. 13. In the present case, the learned Family Court assessed the income of the petitioner/husband to be ₹4,00,000 per month, and awarded interim maintenance to the tune of ₹1,00,000/- per month to the petitioner/wife. 14. Undisputedly, the petitioner/husband is a partner in Ranson Sports Industry. It is the contention of the petitioner that This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 5 of 7 he is earning merely ₹50,000/- per month. The learned Family Court, in this regard, noted that while the petitioner/husband stated that he was earning a sum of ₹50,000/- per month, and not ₹20,00,000/- per month as alleged by the petitioner/wife, the lifestyle maintained by him prima facie indicated otherwise. 15. The learned Family Court perused the documents and photographs appended by the petitioner/wife, and noted that the petitioner/husband took various foreign trips which would not have been possible had he been earning only a sum of ₹50,000/- per month. It was noted that the petitioner/husband resided in a big house, used expensive cars and also has business in Munich, Germany. 16. It was noted that the family of the petitioner/husband maintained three servants and two drivers. It was noted that Ranson Sports Industry had been manufacturing big brand sports equipment for reputed brands. Considering the lifestyle led by the petitioner/husband, it was rightly noted that his actual income cannot be ₹50,000/- per month. 17. It is common knowledge that parties embroiled in matrimonial disputes have a tendency to downplay their income and exaggerate their expenditure in order to evade their liability to pay/claim maintenance. It has been noted in a catena of judgments that the income tax returns do not necessarily provide an accurate reflection of the actual income in such cases (Ref. Kiran Tomar v. State of U.P. : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1539). For this reason, the Courts in such circumstances are permitted to make some guess work and arrive at a figure that a party may reasonably be earning (Ref: Bharat Hegde v. Saroj Hegde : 2007 SCC OnLine Del 622). 18. From a perusal of the material on record, this Court does This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 6 of 7 not find any infirmity in the prima facie assessment of the income of the petitioner/husband to the tune of ₹4,00,000/- per month, and the quantum of the interim maintenance for a sum of ₹1,00,000/- per month to the petitioner/wife. While it has been contended that the petitioner/wife has her own independent source of income, evidence has not been led to substantiate the same. 19. A contention that since the petitioner/wife is living in adultery, she is thereby not entitled to any grant of maintenance as per the bar under Section 125(4) of the CrPC has also been raised. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner/husband has drawn the attention of this Court to certain WhatsApp chats to substantiate the contention. This Court has perused the chats appended with the petition. However, a bare perusal of the same does not by itself conclusively establish that the petitioner/wife is living in adultery, and is disentitled to grant of interim maintenance. 20. The issue whether the petitioner/wife is living in adultery or not can only be decided during the course of trial after the parties have led their evidence. Clearly, if during the course of trial after the parties have led their evidence, it is established that the petitioner/wife is living in adultery, the learned Family Court can pass an appropriate order including the return of maintenance amount if it so deems fit. While determining the factum of interim maintenance, this Court is thus not inclined to delve into such disputed questions of facts at this stage. 21. It is not disputed that the impugned order is only in relation to grant of interim maintenance. The defences raised by the petitioners, along with the allegations and counter allegations, would be the subject matter of trial, and would have to be This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51
CRL.REV.P. 689/2023 & CRL.REV.P. 886/2024 Page 7 of 7 decided after the parties have led their evidence. 22. The learned Family Court is directed to pass the final order uninfluenced by the observations made in this order. 23. In view of the above, this Court finds no reason to interfere with the impugned order, and the petitions are dismissed in the aforesaid terms. Pending application(s) also stand disposed of. 24. A copy of the order be placed in both the matters. AMIT MAHAJAN, J DECEMBER 23, 2024/“akc” This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/01/2025 at 12:11:51