Interim maintenance awarded must reflect the living circumstances of the family and the income of the husband, adhering to the framework established under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

JUDGMENT :

Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.

1. No one appears to represent the Opposite Parties.

2. Heard the submissions of the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

3. This is an application filed on behalf of the present petitioner being the wife against an order dated December 05, 2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4^th Court, Alipore, 24 Parganas (South), in connection with ACM- 914 of 2019 whereby the Opposite Party no.1 was directed to pay an amount of Rs.6000/- per month to the petitioner and Rs.5000/- per month to each of her two daughters as an ad interim maintenance.

4. The fact of the case of the petitioner in a nutshell is that the marriage between the parties solemnized on May 13, 1995 and they were blessed with three children. After that the present petitioner being neglected and deserted by the opposite party no.1 along with her three children, filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 praying for the a monthly amount of interim maintenance of Rs.20, 000/- for herself and Rs.20, 000/- each for her two minor daughters from the date of filing of the application. The said application for maintenance was transferred to the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 4^th Court, Alipore for its final adjudication and, accordingly, the process was issued against the Opposite Party no.1. It was further alleged by the present petitioner in her application under Section 125 of the Code, that at the time of marriage, several valuable articles and ornaments were presented by her parents which were all entrusted to the Opposite Party no.1 herein. However, the present petitioner is unemployed and had no source of income to maintain herself as well as her minor daughters who were born on December 19, 2002 and May 24, 2009. The son, who was born on October 06, 1996, has attained majority.

5. The learned Magistrate considering rival views of the parties by an order dated December, 05, 2022, passed the direction to the husband to pay the interim maintenance of Rs.6,000/- per month for the wife and Rs.5,000/- per month each for two minor daughters totaling to Rs.16,000/- per month. It is the further case of the petitioner that the opposite party no.1 is employed in Garden Reach Shipbuilders & Engineers Ltd. In the department of Maintenance and was drawing a salary of Rs.80, 000/- therefrom. But the learned Magistrate despite considering such fact, passed the aforesaid paltry sum of Rs.16,000/- in total per month for the wife and two minor daughters from the date of filing of the case considering the net income of the husband/Opposite Party no.1

6. The learned Advocate for the petitioner in this regard has relied upon the following decisions in the cases of Rajnesh Vs. Neha, AIR 2021 SUPREME COURT 569, Chitra Majumder Vs. Arun Majumder, AIR ONLINE 2018 SC 412, Shuvojyoti Bagchi Vs. Banti Roychoudhury, AIR ONLINE 2019 CAL 1051, Kalyan Dey Chowdhury Vs. Rita Dey Chowdhury nee Nandy, AIR 2017 SUPREME COURT 2383, Dr. Kulbhushan Kunwar Vs. Smt. Raj Kumari, AIR 1971 SUPREME COURT 234 and Smt. Soma Mitranee Gharai Vs. null, AIR ONLINE 2022 CAL 1471

7. It is the specific contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioner that it was observed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha (supra) decision so far as the maintenance of minor children is concerned, that the living expenses of the child would include expenses for food, clothing, residence, medical expenses, education of the child. Extra coaching classes or any other vocational training courses to complement the basic education must be factored in, while awarding the child support. Serious disability or ill- health of the spouse, child/children, relative who require constant care and expenditure, would be relevant consideration for determination of maintenance.

8. In this case, learned Magistrate did not consider the age of the children who are the minor daughters and are school going and in order to maintain the