IMPORTANT POINT
Maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act is supplementary to that under Section 125 of the CrPC, and previous awards must be disclosed and considered in subsequent claims.

ORDER :

Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.

1. Since common question of facts and law are involved in both the criminal revision petitions, they are heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common order.

2. For sake of convenience, CRR No. 936 of 2023 is being treated as lead case.

3. CRR No. 936 of 2023 has been preferred by husband assailing the order dated 25.07.2023, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (FTC) Durg, District- Durg (C.G.) in Criminal Appeal No. 190/2023 arising out of order dated 27.09.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg, District-Durg (C.G.) in M.J.C. Cr. Case No. 1121/2017, whereby the application filed by non-applicant/wife under Section 22 of the Domestic Violence Act has been allowed and awarded compensation to the tune of Rs. 35,000/- to the non-applicant/wife and Rs. 10,000/- as cost of the proceeding under Domestic Violence Act. Learned Family Court has also directed the husband to pay Rs. 7,000/- as maintenance to wife and Rs.5,000/- per month to two minor sons Rs. 5,000/- till they attain the age of majority. Learned Family Court has further directed for adjustment of the amount Rs. 2500/- granted to the wife under Section 125 of CrPC vide order dated 05.01.2016 as well as Rs. 2,000/- each of the sons which has been granted by the learned 3rd Additional Chief Family Court, Durg. The appellant has also assailed the order passed in Criminal Appeal Nol. 190 of 2023 by which the appeal filed by the applicant/husband has been dismissed.

4. CRR No. 409 of 2023 has been preferred by the applicants/wife & children assailing the order dated 14.03.2023 passed by the learned Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) in Misc. Criminal Case No. 292/2019, by which learned Family Court rejected the application filed under Section 127 (1) of the Cr.P.C.

5. The brief facts as reflected from records are that the marriage between Jitendra Banwakde & Savita Banwakde was solemnized in the year 2001 as per Hindu rites and rituals and out of their wedlock, Kapil Banwakde (son) & Harsh Banwakde were born. After sometime of their marriage, dispute arose between them due to which they are living separately and the children are living with wife in her parental house. The applicant was neglecting the maintenance to non-applicants, therefore, they preferred an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for maintenance which was allowed vide order dated 05.01.2016 passed by Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg and maintenance of Rs. 2500/- per month to the wife and Rs. 2000/- each per month to the children have been awarded. Thereafter the non-applicant has filed application under Section 127 (1) of the Cr.P.C. for enhancement of the awarded amount, which has been dismissed by the learned Third Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Durg (C.G.) vide order dated 14.03.2023 in Misc. Criminal Case No. 292/2019.

6. In the meantime, the non-applicant/wife filed an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act which has been allowed and compensation to the tune of Rs. 35,000/- has been granted to the non-applicant/wife vide order dated 27.09.2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Durg, District-Durg (C.G.) in M.J.C. Cr. Case No. 1121/2017. But the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class has not granted maintenance under Section 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (in short Act), therefore, she has preferred an appeal before the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Durg which was registered as Criminal Appeal No. 131 of 2023. The said appeal has been allowed and directed for maintenance of Rs. 7,000/- to wife and Rs. 5,000/- each of sons, subject to the adjustment as mentioned in forgoing paragraph by this court.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant/husband would submit that the learned trial Court has failed to see that the non-applicant/wife has also filed an application under Section 1