Grounds to deny Maintenance and Domestic Violence Claims

CRPC 340 Criminal case against Wife for making False calim in Maintance Case 

http://www.savefamily.in/73-crpc-340-criminal-case-against-wife-for-making-false-calim-in-maintance-case.html

HIS HONOUR JUDGE: 24 th DECEMBER, 2013 . school. The respondent is doing a job as a pre-primary Teacher at she does not want to give written reply. parties. has neither made a complaint under sub-Section (1) in 2011 (Exh.13) for interim maintenance under the provisions of herself and what was stated by her is not true. requirements like food, shelter and clothes from the person who isसतय ं वदं” “Tell dignity and respect in that amount and the income of the petitioner is that the respondent is absolved from the criminal liability. Therefore, th December, 2013 Family Court No.3, Mumbai.
ORDER BELOW EXH.56
This is an application filed by the petitioner for taking
action for perjury against respondent-wife.
2. According to the petitioner he has filed this petition for
decree of divorce. The respondent had filed interim application for
maintenance pendentelite on 28-4-2011 stating in para No.10 of said
application, “I have no source of income and have become burden
on my parents, it is embarrassing and ridiculous situation as I am
being compelled to depend upon parents for my daily needs, after
marriage”. The respondent has also mentioned, “I do not have any
other source of income.”
3. According to the petitioner, the respondent used to work
as a Teacher in a school prior to her marriage is admitted position.
The petitioner had filed an application for review of order by
producing documentary proof that the respondent is working as a
school Teacher and her photograph appears in the magazine of the


Thakur Public School, Kandivali (E) and having permanent job and
also having bank account in Saraswat Bank, Kandivali (E) Branch,
vide salary account No.4963957. The respondent had refused to
produce any document in spite of the petitioner has filed on record
the book published by the school, where the respondent is working
as a Teacher. The respondent has filed her affidavit as per the
direction of this Court, which speaks abut her employment. It is
admitted that she was working full-time and getting Rs.7500/- per
month but in spite of calling upon her to produce her bank statement
and income proof, she refrained from doing so.
4. According to the petitioner, after the witness summons
and a document brought on record, it is revealed by the order of this
Court dated 7-5-2013 that the respondent is a liar and she obtained
the interim maintenance order by misguiding this Court by
purposefully stating lie on oath and concealing the material fact by
not producing documents which are in her possession and made the
petitioner to suffer. Therefore, the petitioner has requested for taking
legal action against the respondent under the provisions of Section
195 and Section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code.
5. After filing of this application, my learned predecessor
has passed order dated 3-7-2013 of issuance of notice under
Section 340 of Criminal Procedure Code. The copy of this
application was given to the respondent on the same day i.e. on 3-7-
2013. On 5-8-2013 the learned Advocate for the respondent had
made a remark on the overleaf of the application that she will argue,


6. I have heard learned Advocate Smt. Usha Tanna for the
petitioner and learned Advocate Smt. Jivan Vijay for the respondentwife.
The learned Advocate for the petitioner has vehemently argued
that, though the respondent has source of income, she has made
false averments in her application that she did not have any source
of income. She has sworn affidavit with false contents. The learned
Advocate has further submitted that while deciding the review
application of the husband, this Court has made observations in
respect of the false averments made by the respondent and
therefore, it is necessary to initiate action of perjury against the
respondent-wife.
7. Smt. Jivan Vijay, learned Advocate, appearing for the
respondent-wife has submitted that false accusations are made
against the respondent. She has filed her documents on record and
in view of modified order, the quantum of the maintenance was
reduced and this Court, while deciding the review application, has
imposed exemplary cost of Rs.5000/- on the respondent and
therefore already action is taken against the respondent. Now, there
is no need to proceed against the respondent under the provisions of
Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Advocate for the
respondent has further submitted that there was no malice or
intention to mislead this Court and the bonafide mistake of the
respondent be excused.
8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
submissions canvassed by the learned Advocates for both the


9. The provisions of Chapter XXVI of Code of Criminal
Procedure deal with offences affecting the administration of justice.
Section 195 of said Code speaks about prosecution for contempt of
lawful authority of public servants, for offences against public justice
and for offences relating to documents given in evidence. The
provisions of Section 340 of the Code reads as under :
“Procedure in cases mentioned in Section 195- (1) When,
upon an application made to it in this behalf or otherwise,
any Court is of opinion that it is expedient in the interest
of justice that an inquiry should be made into any offence
referred to in clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 195,
which appears to have been committed in or in relation to
a proceeding in that Court or, as the case may be, in
respect of a document produced or given in evidence in a
proceeding in that Court, such Court may, after such
preliminary inquiry, if any, as it thinks necessary,-
(a) record a finding to that effect;
(b) make a complaint thereof in writing;
(c ) send it to a Magistrate of the first class having
jurisdiction;
(d) take sufficient security for the appearance of the
accused before such Magistrate, or if the alleged offence
is non-bailable and the Court thinks it necessary so to do,
send the accused in custody to such Magistrate; and
(e) bind over any person to appear and give evidence
before such Magistrate.
(2) The power conferred on a Court by sub-Section (1) in
respect of an offence may, in any case where that Court


respect of that offence nor rejected an application for the
making of such complaint, be exercised by the Court to
which such former Court is subordinate within the
meaning of sub-section (4) of Section 195.
(3) A complaint made under this section shall be signed,-
(a) where the Court making the complaint is a High
Court, by such officer of the Court as the Court may
appoint;
(b) in any other case, by the presiding officer of the
Court or by such officer of the Court as the Court may
authorise in writing in this behalf.
(4) In this section, “Court” has the same meaning as in
Section 195.”
10. In the case in hand the petitioner-husband has filed main
petition for divorce under the provisions of Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu
Marriage Act. The respondent has submitted written statement at
Exh.12. After the appearance of the respondent, both the parties
were referred to the Marriage Counsellor for exploring the possibility
of reconciliation and amicable settlement. However, no
reconciliation or amicable settlement had taken place. Even after
hearing of the argument of present application at Exh.56, I had
referred both the parties to Judge Mediator, to work out the
settlement between the parties. However, the parties could not
come to terms and accordingly Judge Mediator has submitted the
report.
11. The respondent had filed interim application No.162 of


Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. Said application was contested by
the petitioner. Said application was decided on 2-3-2012 by my
learned predecessor and interim maintenance at the rate of
Rs.20,000/- per month was granted to the respondent, from the date
of said application i.e. 28-4-2011. The respondent was also given
litigation cost of Rs.20,000/-.
12. On 11-5-2012 the petitioner had filed application for
review and/or cancellation of maintenance order dated 2-3-2012.
The said application was resisted by the respondent by filing her
reply on Exh.32 and after hearing both the parties, the said
application was decided on 7-5-2013. In view of that order, the
quantum of maintenance granted to the respondent was reduced
from Rs.20,000/- per month to Rs.13,000/- per month.
13. In the original interim maintenance application at Exh.13
in para No.10 the respondent has stated that she has no source of
income and has become burden on her parents, it is embarrassing
and ridiculous situation as she being compelled to depend upon
parents for her daily needs, after marriage. Further, in para No.13 of
said application the respondent has stated that she is a simple
graduate and cannot earn her livelihood and it is the duty of the
petitioner to provide for the same. While replying these averments,
the petitioner had stated in para No.8 of his reply at Exh.17 that the
respondent is well educated and accomplish and qualified graduate
with expertise in teaching institution and was employed in Nursery
Institution and thus the respondent was capable of maintaining


14. Now, it is necessary to see what observations are made
by my learned predecessor while deciding the review application at
Exh.30, in respect of the income of the respondent-wife. The
observations made in para No.10 of said order runs as under :
“While disposing interim maintenance application, this
Court in para No.4 has observed that there is no record
before Court to believe that respondent-wife is an earning
member. This observation was based upon statement of
respondent and also from the circumstance that there
was no record before Court to prove the earning of the
respondent. The documents which are referred herein in
this order clearly reveal that on the date of passing of the
order and on the date of moving an application for interim
maintenance, respondent was an earning member, so
respondent has misguided this Court to believe that she
do not have any income. She has suppressed vital
information from the Court that she is earning about
Rs.6804/- by being working as a Pre-primary Teacher in a
school”.
15. It is settled position of law that while determining
quantum of maintenance the regard shall be had to the status and
position of the parties, income of both the parties, reasonable wants
of the claimant and number of persons dependent upon the payer.
The provisions of maintenance are benevolent provisions. These
provisions are made to prevent vagrancy of destitute wife and the
minor children. The person who is liable to maintain his dependents,
has to provide maintenance to his dependents, so that they can keep
their soul and body together and they should not face any problem in
their day-to-day life. The needy persons are entitled to get the basic


liable to maintain them as per the provisions of law.
16. It is settled principle of law that he who seeks equity,
must do equity. The fraud and justice cannot dwell together. The
justice seeker must step in the Court with clean hands. The
dishonest person cannot be entertained by the Court of law. In
matrimonial matters persons come with their family problems before
the Court and Court makes every possible attempt to find out
solution of their problems. In such circumstances, it is the first and
foremost responsibility of the party to tell the truth to the Court, so
that Court can go to the root of the matter to solve the real dispute.
There should not be game of hide and seek when justice is sought
from the Court of law. All the Dharmashastras teach us “
the truth”. Foundation of every case must be on true and honest
disclosure of facts. No place can be given to lies or falsehood during
the course of administration of justice. The person who comes to the
Court i.e. house of justice, to seek justice, has to show his bonafides
and honesty by making true disclosure of the facts within his
knowledge.
17. Here it has been established that the respondent-wife
has suppressed vital information from the Court that she is earning
about Rs.6804/- by being working as a Pre-primary Teacher in a
school. It was the prime duty of the respondent-wife to come in the
Court with clean hands by stating that she is earning Rs.6804/- per
month. If she wants to claim maintenance from the petitioner, she
has to make out a case that it is not possible for her to lead life with


at higher side. She has to show the disparity between her income
and income of the respondent and by making such type of true
disclosure of the facts, she should have claimed maintenance
amount from the petitioner. But this has not been happened in this
case. The respondent-wife has made false averments in her interim
maintenance application by stating that she has no source of income
and she is burden upon her parents. She has not taken pain to
disclose her income, though it may be meager. On the contrary, she
has made false statements on oath.
18. While submitting the application for interim maintenance,
the respondent-wife has taken oath and she has sworn affidavit on
the application itself. This goes to show that she has made false
averments knowingly in a Court proceeding. In such circumstances,
prima facie, the offences punishable under Section 177, 181, 182
and 191, read with Section 193 of Indian penal Code are attracted.
Because of the false statements made by the respondent in her
application for interim maintenance, this Court is misled and
misguided and therefore, the petitioner has suffered and he was
directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month.
19. The petitioner was required to file application for review
of said order and accepting his contention, the quantum of
maintenance was reduced from Rs.20,000/- per month to
Rs.13,000/- per month. While deciding the said application, my
learned predecessor has imposed exemplary cost of Rs.5000/- on
the respondent for making false statements. But it does not mean


it is necessary to take action against the respondent as per the
provisions of Section 195 and 340 of Criminal Procedure Code. The
Deputy Registrar of this Court has to file complaint against the
respondent in competent Court for the offences discussed above.
20. In view of my foregoing discussion, I come to the
conclusion that, the application at Exh.56 deserves to be allowed. In
the result, I proceed to pass the following order.

O R D E R

1. The application at Exh.56 is allowed.
2. The Deputy Registrar of Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai,
is directed to file complaint against the respondent-wife in competent
Court, for the offences punishable under Section 177, 181, 182 and
191, read with Section 193 of Indian penal Code.
3. The Deputy Registrar is authorized to take true copies of
entire proceedings to file along with the complaint in the competent
Court.
4. Inform this order to Deputy Registrar, Family Court,
Bandra, Mumbai.
Sd/-24-12-2013
( Subhash R. Kafre )
Judge,
Date : 24