Court must consider both parties' financial situations and earning capacities when determining maintenance amounts.

JUDGMENT : 

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

1. Criminal Revision Petition under Sections 438 /442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’) has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner/Ankush Kumar Parashar for setting aside/modify Order dated 30.04.2024 passed by learned Judge, Family Courts, North District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in MT Case No.504/2019, whereby Petition under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ Cr.P.C .’) filed by the Respondents was allowed and the Petitioner was directed to pay maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- per month.

2. It is submitted that the Petitioner/Ankush Kumar Parashar and Respondent No.1/ Sapna @ Mona got married on 02.07.2017 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. One child, namely, Master Madhav/Respondent No.2 was born from the said wedlock on 13.06.2018, who is presently in custody of Respondent No.1. She is alleged to have left the matrimonial home by her free will, without any sufficient reason.

3. The Petitioner has claimed that he has been deprived of love, affection and bonding with his son, as Respondent No.1 on several occasions, has rejected his request to meet the son. The Petitioner also approached the Respondents through common family members and well- wishers to join his company, but Respondent No.1 remained under the influence of her family members and kept insisting that the Petitioner must shift in the vicinity of her parental home.

4. She used to spend less time in her matrimonial home and more with her parents. There were several instances when she insulted and abused the Petitioner publically and threatened him with dire consequences, if he did not sever his ties with his parents and family members. Their relationship turned from bad to worse over of period of time.

5. Eventually, she withdrew from the company of the Petitioner without sufficient reasons in April, 2018. Thereafter, she filed a Maintenance Petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in November, 2019 claiming maintenance of Rs.25,000/- per month, only to extort money from the Petitioner and harass him.

6. She alleged that the Petitioner was drawing a salary of Rs.70,000/- per month, even though no document was produced in support of this assertion. She also alleged that the Petitioner has no liability except that of the Respondents, whereas he is maintaining his parents, who are senior citizens and unemployed.

7. The Petitioner has asserted that he is willing to keep and maintain the Respondents. He made bona fide effort to resolve the issues by approaching Respondent No.1 and her family members on 10.04.2021 and went to her parental home for productive conversations.

8. The Petitioner has submitted that he was working as Assistant Process Manager, Eclerx-Agllyst, DLF. He had filed his Written Statement and Affidavit of Income and Bank Account Statements in the Maintenance Petition, which reflects his net salary after deductions as Rs.36,000/- per month. Additionally, he had purchased a Flat in the year 2016 for which he was paying EMI of Housing Loan @ Rs.11,341/- per month. He is also paying rent @ Rs.9,000/- per month, aside from spending about Rs.8,000/- per month on the expenses of his parents and Rs.7,000/- per month towards his personal expenses. He further submits that because of his medical condition, he was unable to lead evidence in the present case.

9. It is submitted that Respondent No.1 is B.Com. (Graduate). Prior to their marriage, she was teaching in a school and presently she is doing tailoring/boutique work and is earning more than Rs.15,000/- per month.

10. It is further submitted that on the basis of assumption that the Petitioner was drawing salary of Rs.50,000/- per month, learned Judge, Family Courts awarded interim maintenance in favour of the Respondents @ Rs.20,000/- per month w.e.f. from the date of filing of the Application till disposal of the main P