Guna v. Jancy Rani

ORDER This Criminal Revision Case has been filed to set aside the Order passed in Crl MP No.107 of 2024 in MC No. 13 of 2024 dated 27-4-2026 on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry

¶2The facts of the case are that the Revision Petitioner and the 1st Respondent got married on 09.09.2021 and the 2nd Respondent is the minor Page2 of 5 female child, born to them. The 1st Respondent had filed MC.No.52 of 2019, seeking maintenance before the Trial Court. The learned Trial Court, by the impugned order dated 12.02.2026, a sum of Rs.12,000/- p.m. was ordered to be paid to the Respondents as interim maintenance. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Revision Petitioner, seeking the relief, as stated above.

¶3This Court heard Mr.Raveendran, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner. Since no adverse order is passed against the respondents, notice to them is dispensed with.

¶4The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the court below failed to appreciate the fact that the 1st Respondent voluntarily refused to live with him, without any reasonable cause and that without considering the liabilities and the financial status of the Revision Petitioner and also the source of income available to the 1st Respondent, the Trial Court had passed the impugned order, granting interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.12,000/- p.m. to the respondents and that without proper application of mind, the impugned order had been passed in a mechanical manner and hence, this Criminal Revision Case is liable to be allowed, as prayed for.

¶5This Court considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the Page3 of 5 petitioner and also perused the entire materials placed on record.

¶6The fact that the Revision Petitioner is the husband of the 1st Respondent and they got a female child/2nd Respondent, have not been denied. The amount fixed towards interim maintenance by the Court Below is Rs.12,000/- for the respondents, which, in the present days of rising prices and high cost of living, cannot be considered as excessive or disproportionate or unreasonable. The said monetary relief granted to the Respondents, by the courts below is adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living, to which the aggrieved person is accustomed. The provisions of Section 144 of BNSS are enacted to stop the vagrancy of a destitute wife/child and provide some succour to them, who are entitled to get the maintenance, which cannot be denied. Further, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has not been able to point out any illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned orders, granting such quantum of maintenance, warranting interference by this Court.

¶7In such circumstances, to meet the ends of justice, the impugned orders does not require any interference by this Court, as this court does not find any illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned orders and this Criminal Revision Case lack merits and hence, it is liable to be dismissed. Page4 of 5

¶8In the result, the Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed, as devoid of merits. There is no order as to costs. 16-07-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order rli To The Family court, Puducherry. CRLoRCoNo.o1424oofo2026 SHAMIMoAHMED,oJ. rli CRLoRCoNo.o1424oofo2026 16-07-2026 Page5oofo5

Page1 of 5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 16-07-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED Guna S/o. Ragavel, No.3, Pillaiyarkoil Street, Ulleripattu, Cuddalore Taluk and District-607 402. ..Petitioner(s) Vs 1. Jancy Rani D/o. Parthasarathi 2. Pranvika (Minor) D/o. Guna ..Respondent(s) Prayer To set aside the Order passed in Crl MP No.107 of 2024 in MC No. 13 of 2024 dated 27-4-2026 on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s): Mr. K.Raveendran