The court established that the interim maintenance awarded under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act must address the immediate financial needs of aggrieved persons, reflecting their standard of living, and appellate courts should respect trial findings unless manifestly unlawful.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. The petitioner has filed this criminal revision challenging the order dated 10.08.2023, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela in Crl. Appeal No. 34 of 2021, modifying the order dated 27.10.2021, passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Rourkela, in D.V. Misc. Case No. 243 of 2021, enhancing the monthly maintenance from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- and granting an additional sum of Rs. 10,000/- towards the education expenses of Opposite Party Nos. 2 and 3.

I. FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this CRLREV are as follows:

i. The petitioner is a lecturer in History at Hrushikesh Ray Higher Secondary School, Chhend, Rourkela. His wife, Opposite Party No. 1, works as a beautician. Their marriage was solemnized on 23.04.1995, and after their marriage, both the parties have continued to stay together at Rourkela till 06.05.2020. They have two daughters, Opposite Parties Nos. 2 and 3.

ii. Opposite Party No. 1, along with Opposite Parties Nos. 2 and 3, filed Criminal Misc. Case No. 243 of 2021 under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the SDJM, Panposh, Rourkela alleging that they have no independent source of income and are unable to maintain themselves and, therefore, should receive maintenance from the petitioner.

iii. The petitioner, on the other hand, asserted that there was a valid marriage between himself and the Opposite Party No.1 but he has not committed any act of domestic violence but he has unnecessarily been subjected to mental torture by the Opposite Party No.1 by staying separately from him.

iv. During the pendency of the Criminal Misc. Case No. 243 of 2021, Opposite Parties Nos.1 to 3 filed an application under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, seeking interim maintenance. Upon considering the application, the J.M.F.C Rourkela vide order dated 27.10.2021, directed the petitioner to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month towards basic necessities from 30.06.2021, the date on which the application for interim maintenance was filed.

v. In compliance with the order dated 27.10.2021 passed by the J.M.F.C., Rourkela, the petitioner has been paying the interim maintenance of Rs.20,000/- per month to the Opposite Party No.1.

vi. Subsequently, the Opposite Parties Nos. 1 to 3 filed Criminal Appeal No.34 of 2021 under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, before the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela, challenging the interim maintenance order.

vii. The 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rourkela, allowed the appeal, modifying the interim maintenance amount by directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 25,000/- per month instead of Rs. 20,000/-, along with an additional sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards the education expenses of the Opposite Parties Nos. 2 and 3.

viii. Aggrieved by this enhancement of interim maintenance, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking its intervention.

II. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner earnestly made the following submissions in support of his contentions:

i. The petitioner submitted that the judgment of the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, which mechanically enhanced the interim maintenance from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 25,000/- per month and further directed the payme