CRM No. M 16303 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -- CRM No. M 16303 of 2011 Date of decision: 25.05.2011 Vinod Kumar ........ Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another .......Respondent(s) Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur -.- Present: Mr. Brijesh Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Nirmaljit Kaur, J. This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C for quashing of order dated 12.10.2010 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jind in Criminal Revision No. 54 of 2010 titled as “Smt. Kavita v. Vinod Kumar and others” with all the consequential proceedings arising out of the same. Respondent No. 2/complainant filed petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C seeking maintenance from the petitioner. The said petition was dismissed, vide judgment dated 08.06.2010 (P9) passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Safidon (Jind). Thereafter, the aforesaid judgment passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Safidon, Jind was challenged in revision before the Sessions Judge, Jind. The same was CRM No. M 16303 of 2011 2 allowed and the judgment passed by the trial Court was set aside and the revisionist-wife was granted Rs.2,000/- i.e. 1/3rd of the assessed income of the respondent/petitioner as monthly maintenance allowance from the date of its institution vide judgment dated 12.10.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jind. While challenging the judgment dated 12.10.2010 passed the Sessions Judge, Jind, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that respondent No. 2 had left the matrimonial home on 09.07.2003 after two days of her marriage as at that time, she was minor and was studying in the School. She has refused to live with the petitioner. Moreover, the matter was compromised and memorandum of understanding arrived at between the parties. As such, the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C is not maintainable. Heard. It is admitted that the marriage between the parties still subsists. No divorce proceedings are either filed or pending between the parties. It is also not denied that the respondent/complainant is still the wife of the petitioner. Therefore, she is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and as such, she is entitled to the maintenance allowance. Second argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was compromise between the parties has also no merit. A perusal of the alleged compromise shows that there was an agreement between the parties that they are at liberty to get remarried. The very compromise is invalid and against the public policy. No such agreement could have been arrived at in view of fact that there was no CRM No. M 16303 of 2011 3 divorce between the parties till date. The said compromise, if at all, is neither consciously or willingly signed by the respondent-wife. This is evident from the finding recorded by the Appellate Court which reads thus:- “12. Petitioner revisionist Smt. Kavita while appearing as PW1 has categorically deposed that she was not present at the time of compromise EX. D1 was written. The respondent has examined Narain Singh RW2, who, in cross examination has categorically admitted that Kavita did not sign EX. D1 in his presence. He voluntarily stated that her father Hari Om had got it signed from her while going to the other room when other members of the Panchayat were sitting with him. Thus, according to this own witness of the respondent, she was not present at the time when EX. D1 was reduced into writing.” Therefore, the said agreement and the alleged compromise cannot be read into for denying the maintenance allowance under Section 125 Cr.P.C to the legally wedded wife. Lastly, Rs.2,000/- granted as monthly maintenance allowance to the respondent wife is not on the excessive side and is hardly sufficient to make both ends meet. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed being devoid of merits. (Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge 25.05.2011 mohan