1.0 Present Criminal Revision Application under Section 397 r/w 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner original applicantwife to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 20.6.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Criminal Revision Application No.2 of 2012, by which, the learned Revisional Court has partly allowed said revision application preferred by the respondent no.1 hereinoriginal opponent husband and has modified the order passed by the learned JMFC, Jamnagar passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.516 of 2010 and reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs.2000/ to Rs.1500/ per month.
2.0 That the petitioner herein original applicant preferred Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.516 of 2010 in the Court of learned JMFC, Jamnagar claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was the specific case on behalf of the applicant that husband is having monthly income of Rs.15000/ to Rs.20,000/ and therefore, claim Rs.5000/ per month towards maintenance. That on appreciation of evidence the learned JMFC, Jamnagar awarded Rs.2000/ per month to the original applicant.
2.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Magistrate awarding Rs.2000/ per month to the original applicant wife towards maintenance, respondent no.2 hereinoriginal opponent husband preferred Criminal Revision Application No. 2 of 2012 before the learned Sessions Court, Jamnagar and learned Sessions Courtlearned Revisional Court as such confirmed the finding of the learned Magistrate that the income of the husband is Rs.5000/ per month however reducing the amount of maintenance awarded by the learned Magistrate from Rs.2000/ per month to Rs.1500/ per month observing that the husband has liability / responsibility of his parents also.
2.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Revisional Court reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs.2000/ to Rs.1500/ per month, the petitioner hereinoriginal applicantwife has preferred present Criminal Revision Application.
3.0 Shri Rachh, learned advocate for the applicant has vehemently submitted that the learned Revisional Court has materially erred in reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs.2000/ to Rs.1500/ per month. It is submitted that as such the learned Revisional Court has confirmed the finding of the learned Magistrate considering the income of husband at Rs.5000/ per month and therefore, the learned Revisioanl Court is not justified in reducing the amount of maintenance from Rs.2000/ to Rs.1500/ per month. It is submitted that as such the learned Revisional Court has not appreciated the fact that respondent no.1 husband is not the only person who has responsibility to maintain his parent. It is submitted that respondent no.1 husband has other brothers who have also responsibility to maintain their parents. Therefore, it is requested to quash and set aside the impugned order passed by the learned Revisional Court and restored the order passed by the learned JMFC.
4.0 Present Revision Application is opposed by Shri Jasani, learned advocate for the respondent husbandopponent. It is submitted that considering the fact that respondent no.1 has also responsibility to maintain his parent considering the income of the husband at Rs.5000/ per month when the learned Revisional Court has reduced the amount of maintenance from Rs.2000/ to Rs.1500/ per month. The same is not required to be interfered with by exercise of revisional jurisdiction. By making above submissions, it is requested to dismiss the present Criminal Revision Application.
5.0 Ms. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has requested to pass appropriate order considering the facts and circumstances of the case.
6.0 Heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and considered and perused the impugned judgment and order passed by both the Courts. At the outset, it is required to be noted that learned JMFC has considered the income of the original opponenthusband at Rs.5000/ and the said finding has been confirmed by the Revisional Court. Considering the income of the husband at Rs.5000/ per month the learned JMFC awarded Rs.2000/ per month to the applicant hereinoriginal wife towards her maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the same has been arrived by the learned Revisional Court by reducing it to Rs. 1500/ per month. Considering the impugned order passed by the Revisional Court, it appears that learned Revisional Court has reduced the amount of maintenance from Rs.2000/ to Rs.1500/ solely on the ground that the husband has responsibility to maintain his parents. However, learned Revisional Court has not properly appreciated and considered the fact that the husband has other brothers who are also having the responsibility to maintain the parents. The aforesaid aspect has not considered and / or dealt with by the Revisional Court.
7.0 Considering the fact that against the income of the husband at Rs.5000/ when the learned JMFC awarded Rs.2000/ per month to the original applicant wife towards her maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the same was not required to be interfered with by the learned Revisional Court. Awarding Rs.2000/ per month to the wife towards her maintenance cannot be said to be excessive and /or too exorbitant which was required to be interfered with by the learned Revisional Court.
8.0 In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present Criminal Revisional Application succeeds. The impugned judgment and order dated 20.6.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Criminal Revision Application No.2 of 2012 is hereby quashed and set aside and the order passed by the learned JMFC, Jamnagar passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.516 of 2010 is hereby restored. Arrears accordingly to be cleared within the period of four weeks from today. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
“kaushik”
sd/ ( M. R. Shah, J. )