SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J.

1. The petitioner impugns order dated 20.04.2015 of the Trial Court whereby the application of the petitioner seeking interim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) was rejected.

2. The sole reason for rejection of the application, as noticed by the Trial Court, is that considering the educational qualification, it could not be said that the applicant – wife was unable to maintain herself -- for the reason that she has got many avenues to make out her livelihood. The Trial Court was of the view that since the petitioner was qualified and could maintain herself, she could not maintain the application for maintenance against her husband.

3. It is an admitted position that the Trial Court, at that stage, did not go into the merits of the matter to assess the income, if any, of the petitioner and the income of the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Sunita Kachwaha & Others versus Anil Kachwaha 2014 (16) SCC 715 to contend that merely because the petitioner was a qualified person would not be sufficient ground to hold that she is in a position to maintain herself.