Point of Law : It is a trite proposition of law that the wife and children have to live in commensurate with the status of her husband.

ORDER :

1. By way of filing the instant Criminal Revision, petitioners No.1 and 2 have prayed for quashing of the order dated 29.11.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge (Woman Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No.68/2020 and prayed for enhancement of the amount of maintenance passed in their favour.

2. The brief facts as narrated by the petitioners are that petitioner No.1 filed applications under Sections 12 and 23 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 2005’) before the trial Court averring therein that as per Muslim rites and customs, marriage between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent No.2 was solemnized on 06.12.2004 at Jodhpur. Out of this wedlock, petitioner-wife begotten two daughters petitioner No.2 Aarju and second daughter is no more alive. After marriage, relations between the husband and wife were not congenial as petitioner-wife was harassed and humiliated on account of demand of dowry and she was subjected to cruelty by the respondent-husband and his family members. Thus, on certain disputes arising between the parties, the petitioner-wife was ousted from her matrimonial home along with her children. After turning the petitioner wife out of the matrimonial home, respondent-husband solemnized second marriage, thus, she preferred an application (No.16/2020) under Section 23 of the Act of 2005 before the learned Additional Metropolitan Magistrate No.2, Jodhpur Metro (hereinafter referred to as ‘the trial Court’) along with the another application under Section 12 of the Act of 2005 claiming therein that she has no means to maintain herself and children and further that respondent husband was carrying on handicraft business and had sufficient income and means to maintain them as he has having income of Rs.60,000/- per month, she thus prayed for grant of Rs.15,000/- per month towards maintenance from the respondent-husband.

3. After hearing the parties, the trial Court found that the respondent had failed and neglected to maintain his wife and children and that they had no source of income or means to maintain themselves and accordingly held that they were entitled to the grant of maintenance from the respondent. Vide order dated 11.12.2020 the learned trial Court allowed the application filed by the petitioners under Section 23 of the Act of 2005with a direction to the respondent-husband to pay Rs.4,000/- per month (Rs.2,000/- each to petitioners No.1 & 2) to petitioners as maintenance.

4. The said order 11.12.2020 was challenged by both the parties by way of filing separate Criminal Appeals before the learned Sessions Judge (Woman Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur but both the appeals have been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide order dated 29.11.2021. Hence, the instant criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioner-wife.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the finding recorded by the learned trial Court regarding determination of monthly income of the respondent-husband is patently erroneous and it is not discernible as to how the said fact has been deduced by the learned Court below. He further contended that husband is running a handicraft business and getting monthly income of about Rs.60,000/-, it is his duty to maintain wife and daughter and the maintenance awarded @ Rs.4,000/- per month is very meagre amount which needs to be enhanced to the tune of Rs.15,000/- per month. He contended that in such circumstances rejection of prayer for enhancement by the learned Appellate Court is not sustainable in eye of law and the learned Additional Sessions Judge ought to have allowed the appeal filed by the wife for enhancement of the maintenance. He thus prayed that the instant revision petition may be allowed and the order dated 27.11.2021 passed by the learned Appellate Court be quashed and set aside while enhancing the maintenance amount by Rs.4,000/- to Rs.15,000/- per month.

6. As per office report dated 26.0