Harpreet Kaur Vs Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi 6 UID No.

PB0312

In the Court of Ms. Poonam Kashyap, PCS, Judicial Magistrate Ist

Class, Kapurthala.

CNR No.PNKP03-000439-2018.
MNT No.08 of 29.01.2018
Date of Order:03.08.2018.

Harpreet Kaur W/o Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi D/o Sarup Singh, aged

about 25 years, R/o Village Subhanpur, P.S Kotwali, Tehsil & District

Kapurthala.

..….Petitioner.

Versus

Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi S/o Harbhajan Singh @ Babey, R/o Village

Dhaliwal Quadian, (Dera Kala Sanghian Road), Tehsil and District

Jalandhar.

..... Respondent

(Petition U/s 125 Cr.P.C.)

…....

Present: Sh.Gian Singh Noorpuri,Adv. counsel for the petitioner.

Respondent exparte.

ORDER

1. Briefly stating the facts of the present petition are that the

marriage of petitioner was solemnized with respondent on 16.01.2015

according to Sikh Rites and ceremonies at Gurudwara Sahib Markfed

Chowk, Kapurthala and marriage parties was decently accommodated at

Ms. Poonam Kashyap, JMIC, Kpt. UID No.PB0561

Harpreet Kaur Vs Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi 6 UID No.PB0312

Palki Palace Kapurthala. Out of this wedlock, no child has been born. At

the time of marriage of the petitioner with the respondent, the parents of

the petitioner gave sufficient dowry articles and other household articles

to the respondent and his family members. The parents of the petitioner

has spent an amount of Rs. 10 lacs on the marriage of petitioner with

respondent. Since the marriage of petitioner, the respondent had been

compelling the petitioner to bring money and material including different

dowry articles from the parents of the petitioner and petitioner from time

to time had been fulfilling the demand of the respondent and his parents.

Many a times, the parents of the petitioner give huge cash as well as

dowry articles from time to time to the petitioner. The respondent at the

instigation of his parents and sister Maninder Kaur many a times gave

beatings to the petitioner and turned her out of their house in the three

wearing clothes. The petitioner had been coming to her parental home,

who with the help of the respectable, relatives and panchayat members

have been rehabilitated with the hope that better sense will prevail upon

the respondent and his family members, but it was a distant dream for the

petitioner and her parents. The petitioner has passed her graduation and

also passed PGDCA Diploma and presently in the forth semester of MA

in Public Administration and petitioner is making preparation for the final

semester of her education. On 14.10.2017 as usually after finishing the

household works, the petitioner was doing her study in her bed room. The

respondent came there and he started shouting upon the petitioner that

Ms. Poonam Kashyap, JMIC, Kpt. UID No.PB0561

Harpreet Kaur Vs Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi 6 UID No.PB0312

why you started your study without finishing entire household work. The

petitioner tried her best to persuade and to make him understand that the

petitioner is making preparation for the examination of third semester.

Then instantly, the respondent lost his patience and caught hold the

petitioner from her twins and started to beat the petitioner and compelled

the petitioner to leave his house immediately. In the morning, the

respondent again asked the petitioner to leave his house immediately and

threw out the petitioner from his house in three wearing clothes. Since,

then the petitioner is residing with her parents at village Subhanpur, Tehsil

& Distt. Kapurthala. On 23.01.2018, the parents of the petitioner took the

petitioner at her matrimonial home along-with Harjinder Singh, maternal

uncle of the petitioner, Daljit Singh (Masar-husband of mother’s sister)

and they requested the respondent and his family members to keep the

petitioner with them with love and affection, but they refused to keep her.

The petitioner is a household lady and she is having no source of income

of her own. The petitioner do not own movable and immovable property

on her name. The respondent is an agriculturist by profession and is the

only son of his parents. The father of respondent is owner in possession of

15 killa of land. Not only this, the respondent is running a dairy farm and

thus he is easily earning more than Rs. 1,00,000/- per month. Hence this

application.

Ms. Poonam Kashyap, JMIC, Kpt. UID No.PB0561

Harpreet Kaur Vs Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi 6 UID No.PB0312

2. Notice of the petition was given to the respondent. But none

has appeared on behalf of respondent. As such, respondent is proceeded

against exparte.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner was called upon to lead its ex-parte

evidence.

4. In the ex-parte evidence, petitioner Harpreet Kaur herself

stepped into witness box as PW1. Petitioner further examined Sarup

Singh as PW2 and Inderjit Singh as PW3. Thereafter, she closed her

exparte evidence.

5. I have heard the submissions of learned counsel for the

petitioner and have also gone through the record. The learned counsel for

the petitioner has argued that the respondent is duty bound to maintain

the petitioner. He has further argued that the respondent is earning more

than Rs.1,00,000/- per month. So the petitioner are entitled to

maintenance allowance of Rs.25,000/- per month from the date of the

application along-with the litigation expenses to the tune of Rs. 25,000/- .

6. After giving thoughtful consideration to the submissions of

learned counsel for the petitioners and keeping in view the economic

condition of the respondent who is alleged to be earning more than

Rs.1,00,000/- per month but no evidence has come on record as per the

version of the petitioner that income of respondent is Rs.1,00,000/- but

respondent is an able bodied person and his income is assessed as

Rs.1,00,000/-. The petitioners is claiming maintenance as she is not in a

Ms. Poonam Kashyap, JMIC, Kpt. UID No.PB0561

Harpreet Kaur Vs Jatinder Singh @ Jaggi 6 UID No.PB0312

position to meet the hardships in daily life and she is in need of amount

to cope up with the problems in daily life being faced by her. The fact

that the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent is not

disputed. But the respondent being the husband is duty bound not only

statutorily but also morally to provide the maintenance to his wife.

7. In these facts and circumstances, in the light of said

discussion and observations and keeping in view the liability of the

petitioner who is surviving at the mercy of her parents, this Court is of

considered opinion that it would be in the interest of justice if the

petitioner is provided a sum of Rs.3,500/- per month as maintenance.

Therefore, respondent is directed to pay a sum of Rs.3,500./- per month

to the petitioner as maintenance from the date of the petition. The petition

for grant of maintenance is allowed exparte, accordingly. File be

consigned to the Judicial Record Room.

Pronounced in Open Court.

Dated:03.08.2018. (Poonam Kashyap)
(Pooja) Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,
Kapurthala.
(UID-PB0561)

Ms. Poonam Kashyap, JMIC, Kpt. UID No.PB0561