Tejinder Singh Dhindsa, J.

A petition filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') for grant of maintenance has been allowed vide order dated 1.8.2014 by the District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon and in terms thereof, the husband, namely, Gaurav Kumar Bhatia has been directed to pay a sum of Rs. 7,000/- per month to the wife Smt. Gunjan and 5,000/- per month to the minor son, namely, Krish Bhatia as maintenance from the date of filing of the petition i.e. 2.1.2013.

2. The instant revision petition has been preferred by the wife and minor son seeking enhancement of the maintenance awarded to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- per month and thereby seeking modification of the order dated 1.8.2014 passed by the Family Court, Gurgaon.

3. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard at length and the records of the case have been perused.

4. Facts, which are not in dispute, are that the marriage of petitioner No.1 was solemnized with the respondent on 24.6.2011 at Gurgaon as per Hindu rites and ceremonies. A male child was born out of wedlock on 23.11.2012. Parties have been staying separately since 23.4.2012.

5. Petition under Section 125 of the Code seeking maintenance of Rs. 50,000/- per month was filed by the petitioners herein before the Family Court, Gurgaon on 2.1.2013. Such petition was resisted by the husband by taking a stand that the wife was under the mis-guidance of her parents and had left the matrimonial home and staying separately since 23.4.2012 of her own free will and accord.

6. The Family Court, Gurgaon, while passing the order dated 1.8.2014, has discarded such plea of the husband and has observed that no material/evidence was adduced on record to show that the wife had left the company of the husband of her own accord. Pleadings on record would also reveal that the wife had moved an application to the Women Cell and had appeared before the Protection Officer, Gurgaon on 11.4.2012 and thereafter had filed another application before the Protection Officer on 24.4.2012 alleging harassment and physical assault at the hands of the respondent/husband. Even FIR bearing No.473 dated 24.5.2012, under Sections 498-A, 406 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code stands registered at Police Station City Gurgaon against husband and mother-in-law at the instance of petitioner No.1 i.e. the wife.

7. Be that as it may, the order dated 1.8.2014 passed by the Family Court granting maintenance in favour of the wife and minor child by taking a view that the wife has not left the matrimonial home of her own accord, has not been assailed by the husband. Rather, his stand is that the order dated 1.8.2014 passed by the Family Court, Gurgaon is being complied with and the maintenance that has been granted is being duly paid and released in favour of the wife and the minor child.

8. As such, the only issue that would require examination in the instant revision petition is with regard to quantum of maintenance.

9. The scope and purpose behind Section 125 of the Code has been dealt with in a catena of judgments rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. In Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai, 2008(1) RCR (Criminal) 163, the Apex Court, while discussing the basic purpose under Section 125 of the Code, held as follows:

"Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a measure of social justice and is specially enacted to protect women and children and as noted by this Court in Captain Ramesh Chander Kaushal v. Veena Kaushal, (1978) 4 SCC 70 falls within constitutional sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India. It is meant to achieve a social purpose. The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It provides a speedy remedy for the supply of food, clothing and shelter to the deserted wife. It gives effect to fundamental rights and natural duties of a man to maintain his wife, children and parents when they are unable to maintain themselves. The aforesaid position was highlighted in Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v.