Munni Bai vs Bhanwarlal
- SCC(2016) 1 SCC 621
- Neutral2015 INSC 777
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a wife is not being maintained by her husband and is living separately, and there exists no justifiable reason for the separation, the husband is obliged to pay maintenance to the wife, and the matter must be remitted to the trial court for determination of the appropriate quantum of maintenance based on the evidence adduced.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1691 OF 2009
SMT. MUNNI BAI ... APPELLANT(S)
VS.
BHANWARILAL AND ANR. ... RESPONDENT(S)
J U D G M E N T
Anil R. Dave, J.
1. Here the appellant is a miserable lady who has not
been maintained by her husband. It appears from the
record that respondent No.1-husband had been convicted
for committing the offence of bigamy but the appeal filed
against the said order was pending at the relevant point
of time. We are not sure whether in the said appeal
respondent No.1 has succeeded.
2. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the
appellant is not paid any amount of maintenance though
she is staying separately.
3. In the aforesaid circumstances, it cannot be said
that the appellant is staying separately without any
justifiable reason. In our opinion she should be
maintained by respondent-husband.
Signature Not Verified 4. Looking at the facts of the case, we set aside the Digitally signed by Sarita Purohit Date: 2015.10.29 16:56:48 IST Reason: impugned order passed by the High Court and remand the
matter to the trial court so that after considering the
1 evidence, the trial court may take appropriate decision
regarding payment of maintenance.
5. The appeal is disposed of as allowed.
6. Parties to the litigation would remain present
before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tonk, Rajasthan on
25th November, 2015 at 11.00 a.m. so that the proceedings
can be commenced.
.................J. [ANIL R. DAVE]
....................J. [ADARSH KUMAR GOEL] New Delhi;
15th October, 2015.
2 ITEM NO.104 COURT NO.3 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Criminal Appeal No(s). 1691/2009
MUNNI BAI Appellant(s)
VERSUS
BHANWARLAL & ANR. Respondent(s)
Date : 15/10/2015 This appeal was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL R. DAVE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
For Appellant(s) Mr. Ajay Choudhary,Adv. (Not present)
For Respondent(s) Mr. Hari Om Yaduvanshi,Adv.
For Dr. Monika Gusain,Adv.
Mr. Amit Sharma,Adv.
For Mr. Milind Kumar,Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
The appeal is disposed of as allowed in terms of the non-reportable judgement.
(Anita Malhotra) (Sneh Bala Mehra) Court Master Assistant Registrar (Non-reportable judgement is placed on the file.)
3
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free