An order granting interim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is an interlocutory order and not revisable.

JUDGMENT

1. The present criminal revision petition has been filed under Section 397/401 of the CrPC for quashing the order dated 12.10.2022 passed by learned Family Court No. 2, Udaipur in Case No. 273/2022 titled as "Smt Anju v. Anuj@ Alex" whereby the learned Family Court allowed the application under Section 125 CrPC filed by the respondent No. 2 herein and directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs 20,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the respondent No.2 from the date of filing of the application for interim maintenance i.e. from 23.12.2021.

2. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of the present revision petition. It is submitted by learned counsel for the respondent that an order granting interim maintenance under Section 125, CrPC is an interlocutory order and therefore, is not revisable. Accordingly, it is submitted that the present revision petition being not maintainable, deserves to be dismissed. In support of his contention, learned counsel relied upon the decision of this Court delivered in the case of Ramkishan @ Kishanlal v. Smt. Kamla Devi (SB Crl. Revision Petition No. 640/2021), decided on 11.07.2022.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present revision petition is maintainable and an order granting interim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is not an interlocutory order and the present revision petition is worth consideration on its merits. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of this Court delivered in the case of Jeetram Meena v. State of Rajasthan and Anr. (SB Crl. Misc. (Petition) No. 7411/2018) decided on 27.11.2018 and the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court delivered in the case of Sunil Kumar Sabharwal v. Neelam Sabharwal and Anr. (1991 CriLJ 2056).

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties on the aforesaid point and perused the judgments. On a perusal of the judgments, it is amply clear that the judgments have contrary findings.

5. As regards the issue of maintainability of the revision petition against an order granting interim maintenance, it has already been settled by this Court in the case of Vishal Kochar v. Pulkit Sahni and Ors. (MANU/RH/0899/2022) in para 18, 22, 23 and 24, which for the ready reference are reproduced as under:

"18. Similar question arose before the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Anu vs. Ratan Lal Sharma, reported in MANU/RH/0160/1993 : RLR 1993 (1) 125, wherein, it was held that an Interim maintenance Order passed in pending proceeding under Section 125 of CrPC is an interlocutory order. In para No. 11 of the said judgment following observations were made:-

"An interim order of maintenance allowance in the proceedings under Section 125, Cr.P.C. is interim in nature, By such interim order rights and liabilities of the parties are not decided at all. Object of such relief is to grant maintenance to the wife, children or parents, who are unable to maintain themselves and are dependent on the husband, father and son/ daughter as the case may be. Their primary object is to prevent starvation and vagrancy. It is a measure of social justice and to compel a man to perform his moral and legal obligation, he owes to society in respect of his wife, and minor children so that they are not left beggared and destitute on the scrap heap of the society and thereby driven to a life of vagrancy and immorality and crime for their subsistence. Minor children are to be taken care of by the father. It is the moral and legal duty of a father to provide sufficient maintenance for his minor children so that they may have proper meals, clothing, and schooling. Therefore, an interim order of allowances for their maintenance is necessary and now it is permissible after the authoritative judgment of the Apex Court of the Country in Savitri v. Govind Singh: MANU/SC/0104/1985 : 1986 D.M.C. 1. We are of the firm view that any o