SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Raj) 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Divik Ostwal S/o Virendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Ambika Jain W/o Divik Ostwal – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : Surendra Surana
For the Respondents: Ramit Mehta, Tarun Dudia

Judgement Key Points

Both S.B. Criminal Revision Petition Nos. 684/2025 (filed by the husband challenging the grant of interim maintenance) and 845/2025 (filed by the wife seeking enhancement of interim maintenance) were dismissed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur on 03-02-2026.
The court upheld the trial court's order dated 31.08.2024 (affirmed by the appellate court on 06.05.2025), granting interim maintenance of Rs. 40,000/- per month to the wife from 15.02.2022 under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. No interference was warranted in the discretionary, tentative, and provisional assessment of the courts below, as it was neither perverse nor arbitrary. The trial court was directed to expedite the main proceedings under Section 12 of the Act within six months, with all observations limited to the revision petitions and without prejudice to final adjudication. (!) (!) [5][6] (!) [23][24]


ORDER :

In S.B. Criminal Revision Petition No. 684/2025:-

Grievance of the Case

1. By way of filing the instant revision petition, the petitioner– husband assails the judgment dated 06.05.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Woman Atrocities Cases), Jodhpur Metropolitan, Jodhpur in Criminal Appeal No. 91/2024, whereby the appeal preferred by the petitioner–husband has been dismissed and the order dated 31.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 02, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Criminal Misc. Case No. 16/2022 (CIS No. 191/2022) has been affirmed. By the said order dated 31.08.2024, the learned Magistrate allowed the application filed by the respondent–wife under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 and awarded maintenance of Rs. 40,000/- per month in favour of the respondent–wife from the date of application, i.e., 15.02.2022. The impugned appellate judgment, being illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the settled principles of law, has resulted in grave miscarriage of justice and, therefore, warrants interference by this Court in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction under Sections 438 read with 442 of the Bha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top