The main legal point established in the judgment is the criteria for determining the quantum of maintenance, including the factors to be considered and the need for a reasonable and realistic maintenance amount.

JUDGMENT :

1. The present revision has been preferred against an order dated 06.03.2019 passed in Misc. Case No. 72 of 2018 passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Bankura allowing the application for interim maintenance filed by the opposite party No.1 and directing the petitioner to pay interim maintenance allowance @ Rs. 4,000/- per month for the opposite party No.1 and Rs. 4,000/- per month for each of her two minor sons from the date of the order.

2. The petitioner/husband states that the opposite party No.1 filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bankura against the petitioner, inter alia claiming monthly maintenance for herself and also for her two minor children. In connection with the aforesaid case under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the opposite party No. 1 also filed an application for interim maintenance, inter alia, praying for Rs. 40,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application from the petitioner. This application was filed on 6th June, 2018.

3. The petitioner has been contesting the main application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by filing a written objection thereto and therein all material allegations of the opposite party no. 1 were denied by the petitioner.

4. It is stated by the petitioner that the opposite no.1 has sufficient means to maintain herself. Being a highly educated women, the opposite party No. 1 presently is a School Teacher of a private school and earns Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- per month from their and she is also getting Rs. 15,000/- per month from her car business. On the other hand, the petitioner is an employee in a private sector and is posted as Consulting Partner for O.E.M.C.D. Technology Solutions, New Delhi and earns Rs. 50,000/- (Max.) or 10% of the sale, whichever is loss. The petitioner has no other source of income except the aforesaid job, from which the petitioner has to pay Rs. 17,624/- as E.M.I. for the loan of Gaziabad flat and he has to also pay Rs. 3,500/- per month for maintenance of the said flat and Rs. 5,000/- per month to his mother as her maintenance and this facts shows that the petitioner has no capability to provide for such huge amount of maintenance as claimed by the opposite party No.1 in her aforesaid application.

5. The aforesaid application for interim maintenance was allowed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Bankura by an order dated 06.03.2019 in Misc. Case No. 72 of 2018, directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 4000/- per month for the opposite No. 1 and Rs. 4,000/- per month each for her two minor sons from the date of the order.

6. Admittedly the order under revision is an order allowing the prayer for Interim Maintenance and thus considering the nature of the order requires no interference by this court.

7. While disposing of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. finally, the Learned Magistrate can now follow the guidelines as laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs Neha, (2021 SCC 324).

8. The said Judgment discusses the issue of maintenance as a whole. All the Acts providing the said benefit have been considered, discussed and guidelines laid down. The final Directions there in are as follows:-

“VI Final Directions

In view of the foregoing discussion as contained in Part B – I to V of this judgment, we deem it appropriate to pass the following directions in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India : (a) Issue of overlapping jurisdiction To overcome the issue of overlapping jurisdiction, and avoid conflicting orders being passed in different proceedings, it has become necessary to issue directions in this regard, so that there is uniformity in the practice followed by the Family Courts/District Courts/Magistrate Courts throughout the country. We direct that:

(i) where successive claims for maintenance are made by a party under different statut