This criminal reference arises out of proceedings under section 488 read with section 489 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. It appears that on an application made by Smt. Surjeet Kour, on her behalf and on behalf of her minor children, claiming maintenance allowance under section 488 Cr.P.C., the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, R. S. Pura, after hearing the parties, awarded an amount of Rs. 550/- p.m. as maintenance allowance in favour of the petitioners.

3. In view of un-precedent escalation in prices and standard of living, the petitioner- Surjeet Kour, approached the Munsiff, Judicial Magistrate, R.S. Pura, by making a motion under section 489 Cr.P.C. on 08/12/2000 seeking enhancement of the maintenance allowance granted in their favour. Surjeet Kour, further contended that the daughter of the respondent, living with her, is studying in B.A. Part-II and the maintenance allowance already granted under section 488 Cr.P.C. has become insufficient to pursue the studies of the daughter in college, both on account of increase in prices and the expenditure incurred on the purchase of books and being a student of college, to meet her requirements. The application was, however, transferred to the Court of Munsiff, Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, for disposal.

4. Upon notice to the respondent, objections were filed before the learned Magistrate. Bachitar Singh, respondent, however, took a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the application. It was urged before the Magistrate that since the daughter had attained the age of majority on the basis of Date of Birth Certificate produced by him, she was not entitled to the maintenance allowance in view of the amendment of section 488 Cr.P.C. His further submission was that in view of the amended provision of section 488 Cr.P.C. when the daughter attains majority, she is not entitled to claim maintenance allowance. There cannot be alteration and enhancement in the maintenance allowance in favour of the daughter. That Smt. Surjeet Kour, having suppressed this fact viz. her daughter having attained majority, her application for enhancement of maintenance allowance is not maintainable.

5. The learned Magistrate, however, in ignoring the assertion of Bachitar Singh, respondent, held that the father is under an obligation and bound to maintain the daughter till she is married. After having considered the objections raised by Bachitar Singh and the evidence let in by the parties, the Magistrate enhanced the maintenance allowance from Rs. 550/- to Rs. 2,000/- per month w.e.f. the date of order.

6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 20/12/2001 passed by the learned Magistrate, two revisions came to be preferred. One by Surjeet Kour, seeking the setting aside of the order as it has restricted the enhancement of the maintenance upto Rs. 2,000/- p.m. and the same has been allowed from the date of order instead of from the date of petition. It was further prayed that the maintenance allowance be enhanced from Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 4,000/- per month i.e. Rs. 2,000/- each viz. in her favour as well as in favour of her unmarried daughter who is a college going student and the same be paid from the date of petition. The second revision was preferred by Bachitar Singh, husband, for setting aside the order impugned passed by the Magistrate dated 20/12/2001 on the ground that the daughter has become major as per Date of Birth certificate produced by him before the Magistrate and, thus, is not entitled to claim maintenance in view of the amended provision of section 488 Cr.P.C., and, consequently, sought the quashment of the order allowing enhancement under section 489 Cr.P.C. of the maintenance allowance from Rs. 550/- to Rs. 2,000/- p.m. to the wife and the daughter.

7. The Revisional Court, however, declined the prayer of Surjeet Kour for further modification of the enhancement order from Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 4,000/- p.m., to be effective from the date of filing of application instead of from the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document