Mahesh Chandra Sharma, J.

1. Both the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties have jointly requested to finally decide the instant criminal revision petitions together. Hence same are being decided by a common order.

Facts of S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 1287/2015:

2. The instant criminal revision petition has been filed by the applicant/petitioner under section 397 read with section 401 Cr.P.C. praying therein to grant the reliefs as prayed for by her in the application for enhancement of the maintenance.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant/petitioner submitted a complaint under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('Act of 2005' for short hereinafter) against the non-applicants Harit Dheer, Ashok Dheer and Usha Dheer for doing domestic violence with her, restraining the non-applicants for doing domestic violence under section 18 of the Act of 2005, providing her an alternative accommodation under section 19 of the Act of 2005 and also provide to her maintenance etc. under section 20 of the Act of 2005.

4. The non-applicants filed reply to the complaint wherein they admitted about solemnization of marriage with the applicant/petitioner (wife) but rest of the contents of the complaint were controverted and prayed for dismissal of the complaint with cost.

5. Thereafter, the learned court below after hearing arguments on the application for interim relief, passed an order on 10.3.2011 by which he granted an interim maintenance of Rs. 3,000/- p.m. to her.

6. During the pendency of the matter before the learned court below, the applicant/petitioner moved an application on 1.2.2014 under section 25(2) of the Act of 2005 mentioning therein that on the date of passing the order dated 10.3.2011 the respondent No. 2 - Harit Dheer (husband) was earning Rs. 7,000/- p.m., more than three years have lapsed after passing the said order, the cost has become more than the double, the non-applicant/respondent (husband) is earning approx. Rs. 15,000/- p.m. Thus looking to the increase in the salary of the non-applicant/respondent No. 2 (husband), Rs. 6,000/- p.m. may be increased as interim maintenance instead of Rs. 3,000/- p.m.

7. The learned court below after hearing dismissed the said application vide order dated 25.3.2015. The applicant/petitioner (wife) aggrieved with the said order preferred an appeal before the appellate court, which was dismissed vide order dated 22.7.2015. The applicant/petitioner (wife) aggrieved with both the impugned orders has preferred instant criminal revision petition before this Court.

8. During the pendency of instant revision petition, the non-applicant/respondent No. 2 Harit Dheer (husband) filed an additional affidavit before the Court mainly mentioning therein that the applicant/petitioner (wife) has shown his income Rs. 25,000/- p.m. but she has failed to submit any proof on record to this effect, otherwise also no new fact at this stage can be entertained and that too in a state where it has not been supported by an affidavit. The non-applicant/respondent No. 2 (husband) In the affidavit also mentioned that since October 2015 he Is out of job and he has no source of income since then.

9. In rebuttal, the applicant/petitioner (wife) filed counter affidavit to the additional affidavit wherein she has specifically mentioned in para No. 2 of the same that the non-applicant/respondent No. 2 Harit Dheer (husband) is working as Service Manager in Roshan Cars Private Limited, where he is getting salary of Rs. 25,000/- p.m., which is clear from the certificate dated 19.9.2015 (enclosed with the counter affidavit as Annex. CA/1) and thus the applicant/petitioner (wife) rightly showed his income as Rs. 12,000/- p.m. In the additional affidavit, the non-applicant (husband) wrongly averred that he is out of job since October 2015, whereas as per the salary statement which is duly sealed and signed on 7.5.2016 commencing from April 2015 to January 20