- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI REV.PET FAMILY COURT NO. 254 OF 2023 BETWEEN: SRI RAJESH SAWKAR S/O LATE VENKATESH SAWKAR AGED ABOUT 53 YEARS BUSINESS R/O NO 322/1D NEAR KODANDARAMA TEMPLE CHAMARAJAPETE DAVANAGERE 577001 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. CHANDRASHEKAR P. PATEL., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SMT LAKSHMI N G W/O RAJESH AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O 1ST MAIN 6TH CROSS VINOBANAGAR DAVANAGERE 577002 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. 2. RASHMIKA D/O RAJESH SAHUKAR AGED ABOUT 5 YEARS U.K.G STUDENT THE RESPONDENT NO 2 IS MINOR AND HENCE REPRESENTED BY MOTHER SMT LAKSHM N G W/O RAJESH SAHUKAR R/O 1ST MAIN, 6TH CROSS VINOBANAGAR Digitally signed by MEGHA MOHAN Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 DAVANAGERE 577002 DAVANAGERE DISTRICT. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. HAREESH BHANDARY T., ADVOCATE) THIS RPFC IS FILED UNDER SC.19(4) OF THE FAMILY COURT ACT., PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 07.08.2023 PASSED BY THE HONBLE FAMILY COURT, DAVANAGERE IN CRL.MISC NO.254/2023 ON IA NO.2 FILED UNDER SEC. 125(2) OF Cr.P.C. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI ORAL ORDER Aggrieved by the order passed in I.A.No.II in Crl.Misc.No.254/2023 dated 07.08.2023 by the Judge, Family Court, Davanagere, whereby the Family Court had granted maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month to the daughter, the petitioner/husband is before this Court. 2. The parties are referred to as husband and wife for the sake of convenience. 3. The respondents had filed I.A.No.II under Section 125(2) of Cr.P.C. for grant of interim maintenance of an amount of Rs.50,000/- per month. The facts of the case are that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 15.11.2013 and in the wedlock, respondent No.2/daughter is born on 06.07.2018. As she is not able to maintain herself, it is the duty of the husband to maintain the wife and child. 4. The husband has denied the relationship between himself and respondent No.1/wife and he is not the biological father of the child. He had filed his objections stating that he is married to one Smt.Reshma and out of the wedlock two children are born to them and further stated that respondent No.1 had married one Raghavendra and she had filed Crl.Misc.No.114/2013 against the said Raghavendra and the same came to be disposed of in Lok Adalat held on 28.03.2014 and further, on 21.02.2015, respondent No.1 entered into a compromise with Raghavendra and filed a compromise petition dated 21.02.2025 and it is clearly mentioned that respondent No.1/wife and her husband has not taken divorce as on 21.02.2015 and this aspect clearly goes to show that respondent No.1 and Raghavendra are husband and wife and how she claims that she has married the petitioner on 15.11.2023 without taking divorce from her first husband is not - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 known. As such, she is not entitled for any maintenance from the husband as she is not his wife. 5. The Family Court had observed that the wife had filed the petition stating that she is the wife of the petitioner and the wife and child are unable to maintain themselves and the husband has not made any arrangements for their maintenance. The wife had produced the birth certificate of the child, wherein the name of the father is shown as Rajesh and respondent No.1 as mother. The wife had filed an affidavit dated 11.12.2018 stating that he had married her on 15.11.2013. 6. The Family Court by way of order impugned had granted interim maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month to the wife and an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month to the child and the Court had observed that prima facie, the respondents have proved that the petitioner is the husband of respondent No.1 and respondent No.2 is their daughter. Hence, all other issues will be considered by the Family Court at a later stage. As of now, as far as the I.A. for interim maintenance is concerned, she is entitled for maintenance. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 7. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband submits that the evidence on record clearly reveals that till 21.02.2015 she is married to one Raghavendra and the question of her marrying the petitioner/husband in the year 2013 would not arise. Whether she is a legally wedded wife of the petitioner or not and all other issues needs to be decided. Unless and until it is decided, the wife is not entitled for maintenance. It is submitted that the petitioner is not the biological father of the child. 8. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the birth certificate clearly reveals that the petitioner/ husband is the father of the child and also the affidavit that is given to the LIC authorities also discloses that he is accepting the marriage which clearly shows that she is the wife and the child is born in the wedlock. In these circumstances, the Family Court had rightly considered and passed the order granting maintenance to the wife and the daughter and there are no grounds to interfere with the order passed by the Family Court. 9. Having heard the learned counsels on either side, perused the entire material on record. According to the wife, - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 the marriage has taken place on 15.11.2013 and as per the compromise petition dated 21.02.2015, the wife and her first husband had not obtained divorce. The birth of the child is on 06.07.2018 and the affidavit is filed on 11.12.2018. In these circumstances, whether she is the legally wedded wife of the husband or not has to be decided by the Family Court during the course of the trial. Looking at the birth certificate where the name of the petitioner is mentioned as the father, prima facie shows that he is the biological father of the child. In those circumstances, as far as the daughter is concerned, she is entitled for maintenance. In that view of the matter, this Court is passing the following order: ORDER i. The order passed in I.A.No.II in Crl.Misc.No.254/2023 dated 07.08.2023 by the Judge, Family Court, Davanagere, is modified. As far as the order granting maintenance to the wife is concerned, it is set aside and respondent No.2/daughter is entitled for maintenance of an amount of Rs.5,000/- per month. ii. Accordingly, the revision petition is partly allowed. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:35741 RPFC No. 254 of 2023 iii. All I.As. in this petition shall stand closed. SD/- (LALITHA KANNEGANTI) JUDGE MEG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 8