Facts of the Case

Amil Kumar Jain filed a criminal revision before the Chhattisgarh High Court against an order dated 06.08.2022 of the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur, granting his wife, Smt. Pratiksha Jain, interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000 per month in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (Case No. 698 of 2021).

The applicant contended that his wife had left the matrimonial home without justifiable cause, was herself a qualified engineer and gym trainer earning about Rs. 1,00,000 per month, and that the Family Court had failed to consider that he had surrendered his GST registration on 06.10.2021, so that his business was no longer operational.

The Family Court, while granting maintenance, had noted that although the GST registration had been surrendered, the wife had produced a 'Find GST' printout and a GST return dated 20.08.2021 showing the husband was a practising businessman, and on that basis found him capable of paying the maintenance amount fixed.

This is a family law dispute over interim maintenance; the GST registration status was relied upon only as evidence of the husband's income-earning capacity, not as the subject of any GST law adjudication.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000 per month awarded to the wife was excessive, perverse, or unjust in light of the husband's claimed loss of income following surrender of his GST registration.
  2. Whether the Family Court had properly considered the husband's financial condition before fixing the maintenance amount.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The wife had left the matrimonial home of her own accord without justifiable cause and was herself earning approximately Rs. 1,00,000 per month as a qualified engineer and gym trainer.
  • The Family Court had failed to give due weight to the fact that he had surrendered his GST registration on 06.10.2021 and that his business was not presently operational, so he was unable to pay the amount fixed.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The wife's counsel supported the Family Court's order, relying on the GST-related documents (a 'Find GST' printout and a GST return dated 20.08.2021) that indicated the husband continued to be a practising, respectable businessman despite the formal surrender of registration.

Court Order / Findings

  • The High Court held that no infirmity had been shown in the Family Court's determination of Rs. 15,000 per month as interim maintenance, and that the amount was in accordance with the statements made by the parties.
  • It found the amount could not be termed perverse or grossly unjust so as to warrant interference in criminal revision, and dismissed the revision at the admission stage itself as devoid of merit.
  • It clarified that nothing in its order should be construed as an expression on the merits of the main maintenance case.
  • The Family Court was directed to decide the main Section 125 Cr.P.C. petition, with the parties' cooperation, preferably within four months, and was given liberty to reconsider the interim maintenance order if the wife caused any delay.

Important Clarification

This order does not decide any GST question — it is a family-law ruling on the adequacy of interim maintenance. The husband's surrendered GST registration was treated only as one disputed piece of evidence about his income; the Family Court's finding that other GST-related documents still showed him as an active businessman was left undisturbed, but the High Court expressed no independent view on the correctness of that finding, deciding only that the maintenance amount itself was not perverse.

Sections Involved

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 125 (maintenance of wives, children and parents)
  • GST registration records cited only as evidence of income/business activity, with no GST statute adjudicated

Decision – In Favour of

Decided against the husband — the criminal revision was dismissed at the admission stage, and the Rs. 15,000 per month interim maintenance order was left undisturbed, without prejudice to the final decision in the main maintenance petition.

Case Details

High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur. Criminal Revision No. 1033 of 2022 (Amil Kumar Jain v. Smt. Pratiksha Jain). Coram: Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey. Order dated 10.05.2023.

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.