- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4785 RPFC No. 100107 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 14TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 100107 OF 2024 (-) BETWEEN: IKBAL SHAIKH, AGE: 62 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO.152/A1, VILLAGE LAND AKANALLI, MAJAREKASTUR ABA NAGAR, SIRSI-581401. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. MAHANTESH S. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: SHAHID W/O. IKBAL SHAIKH, AGE: 59 YEARS, OCC: HOUSEWORK, R/O. NEW GANDHI NAGAR, BELAGAVI-590001. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. RAM P. GHORPADE, ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SECTION 19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT PRAYING THAT THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 03.04.2024 CRIMINAL MIS NO.382/2017 PASSED BY THE LEARNED I ADDL. PRINCIPAL JUDGE, FAMILY COURT BELAGAVI, KINDLY SET ASIDE BY ALLOWING REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH Digitally signed by ASHPAK KASHIMSA MALAGALADINNI Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH Date: 2025.03.18 10:57:27 +0530 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4785 RPFC No. 100107 of 2024 ORAL ORDER 1. This petition is filed by the respondent – husband challenging the order dated 03.04.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.382/2017 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi1 granting maintenance to the respondent herein. 2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as per their ranking before the Family Court. 3. It is the case of the petitioner before the Family Court that the marriage between the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 18.05.1981 at Sirsi as per Muslim customs. It is stated that the marital life was comfortable for a period of two decades and thereafter the respondent used to ill-treat the petitioner and she was thrown out from the matrimonial home and as such the petitioner has left the matrimonial home and residing separately. Hence, the petitioner has filed 1 Hereinafter referred to as ‘Family Court’ - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4785 RPFC No. 100107 of 2024 Crl.Misc.No.382/2017 before the Family Court seeking maintenance from the respondent. 4. The respondent – husband entered appearance and filed detailed statement of objection contending the respondent - husband is aged 61 years having health ailments and accordingly sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. The Family Court after considering the material on record, by its order dated 03.04.2024, allowed the petition in part by directing the respondent – husband to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.12,000/- to the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the respondent – husband has preferred this petition. 6. I have heard Sri.Mahantesh Hiremath, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Ram P Ghorpade, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 7. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner by inviting attention of the Court to Ex.R.11 - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4785 RPFC No. 100107 of 2024 Nikha Nama that the respondent herein has contracted with second marriage and accordingly the Family Court has erred in awarding maintenance to the respondent herein. 8. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent sought to justify the impugned order. 9. In the light of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and on careful examination of the finding recorded by the Family Court would indicate that the marriage of the petitioner with husband was solemnized on 18.05.1981 and thereafter on account of family rift the parties are residing separately. It is the contention of the petitioner herein that the respondent herein has contracted with second marriage and living happily and further in this regard he invited attention of the Court to Ex.R.11. 10. On careful examination of Ex.R.11 makes it clear that the respondent herein has contracted with - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC-D:4785 RPFC No. 100107 of 2024 second marriage on 08.10.1996. In that view of the matter, I am of the view that the Family Court has not appreciated Ex.R.11 in a proper manner while considering the petition filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. In that view of the matter, since the respondent herein has contracted with second marriage and therefore the respondent herein is not entitled for maintenance from the petitioner herein. 11. Accordingly, I pass the following: ORDER i. The petition is allowed. ii. Order dated 03.04.2024 in Crl.Misc.No.382/2017 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi is hereby set aside. iii. The petition in Crl.Misc.No.382/2017 on the file of the I Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Belagavi is dismissed. Sd/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE SH CT-MCK, List No.: 2 Sl No.: 11