Interim maintenance must reflect the child's needs and not be undermined by the parent's personal liabilities; both parents contribute to the child's welfare.

JUDGMENT :

SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA, J.

1. Heard Ms. S. Dasgupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B.J. Barman, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court No.III, Kamrup(M) in F.C.(Criminal) Case No.162/2024, whereby the revision petitioner/father was directed to pay interim maintenance amount of Rs.5,000/- for maintenance of his minor son.

3. The impugned order dated 21.12.2024 is reproduced hereinbelow, as follows :

“Petitioner is present.

Opposite party is absent without step.

Heard both the parties on interim maintenance allowance on the last date fixed.

This is a case under section 125 Cr.P.C by which the petitioner has claimed monthly interim maintenance allowance of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) from the opposite party for herself and their minor son.

The case of the petitioner is that on 02.12.2018, the petitioner and the opposite party solemnized their marriage as per Hindu rites and rituals. Out of their wedlock, one male child was born on 21.10.2019. The petitioner is an employee in the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Guwahati, Kamrup (M). The opposite party is an employee of Veterinary Department, Govt. of Assam and his monthly salary is Rs.60,000/-(Rupees Sixty Thousand only).

The opposite party in his written statement has admitted his marriage with the petitioner and paternity of the child. The opposite party in his written statement has not denied the claim of the petitioner regarding his profession and income.

Perused the case record and affidavit of assets and liabilities of both the parties.

The petitioner in her affidavit of assets and liabilities has mentioned her monthly income to be Rs.31,193/- (Rupees Thirty One Thousand One Hundred Ninety Three only). The opposite party in his affidavit of assets and liabilities has mentioned his monthly income to be Rs.60,000/-(Rupees Sixty Thousand only).

Upon hearing both the parties, considering the fact of this case and the need of the petitioner, the opposite party is directed to pay Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) per month to the petitioner for their minor son as his interim maintenance till disposal of this case on merit. The petitioner is not considered for interim maintenance at this stage.

This interim maintenance order shall be effective from the month of December, 2024 and the opposite party shall pay the amount within 10th day of every successive month, starting from the month of January, 2025 until further order through the bank account of the petitioner.

Fixing 13.02.2025 for order on counseling.”

4. The impugned order is under challenge principally on the ground that while awarding the aforesaid maintenance amount, the learned Court below has failed to take into account the liabilities of the petitioner, which as submitted on behalf of the petitioner was necessary in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha & Another, reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324 . It is also submitted on behalf of the petitioner that since the respondent/wife is also an earning person having a monthly income of Rs.31,193/- (Rupees thirty one thousand one hundred ninety three), she should also bear part of the expenses of the child.

5. A perusal of the affidavit of Assets and Liabilities submitted by the revision petitioner before the learned Family Court would show that his principal liabilities consists of EMIs to the tune of Rs.21,668/- (Rupees twenty one thousand sis hundred sixty eight) on account of loan of RS.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs) taken by him as Personal Loan from the Bank of India and also EMI of Rs.3,10