IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that maintenance under Sec. 125 and Sec. 127 of the Cr.P.C. can be enhanced based on changes in circumstances, including inflation and increased income of the non-applicant, reinforcing the principle that maintenance should reflect the current financial realities of both parties.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. Heard.

2. Admit. The application is heard finally with the consent of the learned advocates for the parties at the admission stage.

3. In this criminal revision application, challenge is to the judgment and order dtd. 23/5/2016 passed by the learned Judge of the Family Court, Akola, whereby the learned Judge has partly allowed the application for enhancement of the maintenance made under Sec. 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.PC) by the non-applicants.

4. The facts relevant for deciding this revision application are as follows:

The parties would be referred in this judgment by their nomenclature in the application made under Sec. 127 of the Cr.PC before the Family Court. The applicant in this revision is the non-applicant. The non-applicants in this revision are the applicant Nos.1 and 2. The applicant No.1 and the non-applicant got married on 19/5/1997. Applicant No.2 is the son of the applicant No.1 and the non-applicant. At the time of the marriage, the applicant No.1 has passed 12th Standard Examination. The non-applicant is serving as a Professor at Rani Indirabai Bhosale Mahavidyalaya, Kuhi. As per the case of the applicant No.1, after marriage, the non-applicant made a demand of Rs.1, 00, 000.00 from her father. Her father partly satisfied his demand. It is stated that the non-applicant and his other family members started ill-treating the applicant No.1. On 25/5/2008, the non-applicant drove out the applicant No.1 together with the applicant No.2 from his house. The applicant No.1, with the applicant No.2, started residing with her father.

5. The non-applicant did not make any provision for the maintenance of the applicant Nos.1 and 2. They, therefore, filed an application under Sec. 125 of the Cr.PC in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Akola. After establishment of the Family Court at Akola, the said application was transferred to the Family Court. The matter was settled before the Marriage Counsellor of the Family Court, Akola on 13/6/2011. In terms of the settlement, the non-applicant agreed to pay a sum of Rs.4, 000.00 each to the applicant Nos.1 and 2 from 13/6/2011. The applicants in the year 2015 filed an application under Sec. 127 of the Cr.PC and prayed for the enhancement in the maintenance. According to the applicants, the monthly maintenance awarded in the year 2011 is not sufficient to satisfy their bare minimum needs. There has been considerable rise in the inflation. It is their case that since the cost of living has skyrocketed on account of the inflation, the said amount of maintenance was not sufficient to satisfy their day-to-day requirements. The applicant No.2 has been taking education. The applicant No.1 is required to spend huge amount for the education of the applicant No.2. It is stated that they have no source of income. They are unable to maintain themselves. The non-applicant is Professor. His monthly salary is Rs.75, 000.00 to Rs.80, 000.00. He owns with other family members near about 30 acres of agricultural land. The annual income from the agricultural land is near about Rs.10, 00, 000.00. The applicants, therefore, prayed for the enhanced maintenance at the rate of Rs.20, 000.00 per month each.

6. The non-applicant filed the reply and opposed the application. According to the non-applicant, the applicant No.1 is doing service. She has source of income. She has done beauty parlour course. The parents of the applicant No.1 are financially sound. The applicant No.1 is taking beauty parlour classes. She is getting near about Rs.10, 000.00 per month from the said business. She is doing tailoring work. From the said work, she is also getting income.

7. According to the non-applicant, he has been spending money for the education of his son. His son has passed 10th Standard with 86% marks. He has been regularly paying visit to his son and making provision for his education. It is contended that there is no change in the circumstances. He has not d