IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Bibhas Ranjan De, J.
Amar Kumar Pal – Petitioner
Versus
Sutapa Bhadra - Respondent
C.R.R. 4188 of 2024, IA No: CRAN 2 of 2025, CRAN 4 of 2025, CRR 697 of 2024
Decided On :25-09-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common judgment for identical cases. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. maintenance orders and their progression. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. arguments regarding eligibility for maintenance enhancement. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. court's analysis on overlapping jurisdictions for maintenance. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 5. inherent powers of the court and conditions for maintenance. (Para 18 , 19 , 21) |
| 6. judicial scrutiny of enhancement orders. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 7. clarification of the order concerning maintenance. (Para 25 , 26) |
| 8. conclusion and final order. (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
JUDGMENT :
Bibhas Ranjan De, J.
1. Both the revision applications involving identical facts and circumstances and arising out of the self same cause of action shall be disposed of via this common judgment.
2. Revision application being no. CRR 4188 of 2024 has been preferred assailing the Order dated 20.08.2024 passed by Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court Barasat, North 24 Paraganas, in Miscellaneous Case no. 13 of 2012 under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as CrPC) thereby directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 30,000/- per month towards the maintenance of the petitioner from the date of the filing of application.
3. Whereas the other revision application being no. CRR 697 of 2024 has been instituted assailing the Order dated 03.01.2024 passed by Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court Barasat, North 24 Paraganas in connection with Miscellaneous Case no. 13 of 2012 wherein Ld. Magistrate rejected the petition filed by the opposite party therein with a prayer for cancellation of order of maintenance on the ground of award of permanent alimony already granted by the competent Civil Court in a Matrimonial suit.
Background:-
4. Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Barasat, North 24 Parganas disposed of an application thereby directing the opposite party/ petitioner herein to pay Rs. 1500/- per month to the petitioner from the date of filing of the application under Section 125 CrPC along with Rs. 2000/- per month as arrear maintenance till realization.
5. On 16th May, 2012 wife/opposite party herein filed one application under Section 127 of the CrPC for enhancement of maintenance amount, which was registered as Misc. Case no. 13 of 2012. After hearing that the maintenance amount was enhanced from 1,500/- to 14,000/-, being aggrieved, the opposite party/ petitioner herein preferred revision application being CRR No. 1726 of 2018 before this Court and at the same time wife/ opposite party also preferred one revision application being CRR 1129 of 2018. Both the revision applications were disposed of on 13.12.2022 by the Hon’ble Co-ordinate Bench and remanded back the matter with a direction upon the Ld. Magistrate to hear the application afresh as per guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another , (2012) 2 Supreme Court Cases 324
6. Prior to the enhancement of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 14,000/- per month by the Ld. Magistrate on 10.04.2018 in Misc. Case 13 of 2012 under Section 127 of the CrPC, alimony pendente lite was passed directing the husband to pay Rs. 17,000/- per month with effect from 18.04.2017, in connection with MAT Suit no. 34 of 2015.
7. Said order of alimony pendente lite was assailed by the parties by filing their respective applications being no. C.O. 2183 of 2017 and C.O. 2483 of 2017 respectively. Both the Civil Orders were disposed of by a common judgment and order dated 31.10.2017, affirming the amount of alimony pendente lite.
8. The Mat Suit No. 34 of 2015 was decreed on 29.09.2020 wherein Ld. Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 3rd Court, Barasat, directed the petitioner/ husband to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month. Thereafter, on 20.08.2024, Ld. Magistrate, 1st Court, Barasat, North 24 Paragnas, disposed of an application under Section 127 of the CrPC filed by the opposite party/ wife on 19.05.2012 against her husband with a prayer for enhancement of ma
A ruling affirmed that maintenance can be enhanced under Section 127 of the CrPC after permanent alimony, emphasizing the need for consideration of changing circumstances.
A husband's obligation to maintain his wife is a continuing duty that can be adjusted based on substantial changes in financial circumstances, as defined under Sections 125 and 127 of the Code of Cri....
Proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. therefore should precede a proceeding under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C.
Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C should be awarded from the date of the application, and evidence is essential to substantiate income claims.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the quantum of maintenance must be determined based on the financial status of the parties, the reasonable needs of the dependant spouse and c....
Enhancement of maintenance must align with the changing income and circumstances of the parties, recognizing the financial dependency of a spouse irrespective of their qualifications and parental sup....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court has the discretion to enhance the maintenance amount based on changing circumstances, and the delay in adjudication should not depri....
The husband has a duty to provide financial support to the wife and minor children, and maintenance proceedings aim to prevent vagrancy and destitution of a deserted wife.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.