‘Living in Adultery’ denotes a continuous course of conduct and not isolated acts of immorality: Patna High Court [Read Order]

Patna: The Patna High Court has delivered a significant judgment on the maintenance rights of a wife and child, emphasizing the summary nature of proceedings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Justice Jitendra Kumar heard a criminal revision petition challenging a Family Court order that had directed the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance to his wife and daughter.

The case involved a revision petition filed by Avadh Kishore Sah against an order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhagalpur. The Court noted, “The present revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the impugned order dated 14.01.2020, whereby the learned Principal Judge directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 3,000/- per month to his wife and Rs. 2,000/- per month to his daughter towards their maintenance.”

Addressing the specific contention regarding the wife’s alleged adultery, the Court observed, “‘Living in adultery’ denotes a continuous course of conduct and not isolated acts of immorality. One or two lapses from virtue may be acts of adultery, but would not be sufficient to show that the woman was ‘living in adultery.’”

The Court also highlighted the legal presumption regarding the legitimacy of a child born during marriage, stating, “As per Section 112 of the Evidence Act, a child born during the continuation of a valid marriage between his/her mother and any man is presumed to be the legitimate son/daughter of that man, unless it is shown by that man that he had no access to his wife at any time when the child could have been conceived.”

In a specific ruling on the maintenance petition, the Court held, “I find that O.P. No.3/Gudiya Kumari was born to Soni Devi during the continuation of her valid marriage with the petitioner, Avadh Kishore Sah. Hence, there is a mandatory legal presumption that O.P. No.3/Gudiya Kumari is the legitimate daughter of the petitioner.”

The Court emphasized that proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. are “summary in nature and meant to prevent the vagrancy and destitution of wife and children and to provide a speedy remedy for the supply of food, clothing, and shelter to them.”

The Court dismissed the revision petition, upholding the Family Court’s order directing the petitioner to pay the stipulated maintenance amounts to his wife and daughter.

Appearance:
Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Mr. Mirtunjay Kumar Mishra, Mr. Rana Pratap Singh, and Ms. Nitu Kumari, Advocates, appeared for the Petitioner.
Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP, appeared for the State.
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Senior Advocate, along with Ms. Manini Jaiswal, Mr. Binay Krishna, and Mr. Manas Rajdeep, Advocates, appeared for Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3.

Case Title: Avadh Kishore Sah @ Awadhesh Sah vs. The State of Bihar & Ors.

[Read Order]