IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that maintenance for minor children must reflect the actual financial capacity of the non-custodial parent, ensuring adequate support based on their needs.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Bajaj, J.

Petitioners-Smt. Himani Agarwal, Km. Sanvi, Master Dhruv have filed this criminal revision petition to challenge the order dated 19th June, 2023 passed by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No. 2, Meerut, whereby their application bearing No. 5A in Case No. 344/2020 filed under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure has been partly allowed by granting monthly interim maintenance of Rs. 2000/- each in favour of the minor children (petitioner Nos. 2 and 3), whereas the claim of the petitioner No. 1 has been dismissed.

2. Brief facts leading to the present criminal revision petition are that the petitioners filed an application under Section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure against opposite party No. 2-Devesh Gupta for grant of maintenance, wherein it is pleaded that petitioner No. 1 Himani Agarwal got married to Devesh Gupta-opposite party No. 2 on 13th July, 2016 as per the Hindu rites and rituals at Meerut, and this was the second marriage of both the parties, as their previous marriage with their respective spouses stood dissolved. In the marriage, the parents of petitioner No. 1 spent a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/-, which is more than their capacity, and after marriage, she went to her matrimonial home situated at Paschim Vihar, New Delhi, where she discharged all the responsibilities towards the husband and his other family members. The opposite party No. 2 and his relatives were not happy with the dowry and they started harassing the petitioner No. 1 and demanded a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/-, as for their business expansion, Rs. 50,00,000/- were required. The petitioner No. 1 expressed her inability to meet the demand and this resulted in beatings to her. The petitioner No. 1 was employed as a clerk in Bank of Baroda, Meerut at the time of her marriage, but after marriage, she got herself transferred to Paschim Vihar, Delhi and her entire salary used to be given to the opposite party No. 2 and his relatives. On 28th February, 2017, the petitioner No. 1 was blessed with twin children Sanvi and Dhruv, i.e. petitioner Nos. 2 and 3, respectively, at Gupta Medical Centre, Paschim Vihar, Delhi. The petitioner No. 1 informed her parents about her maltreatment as well as the demand of Rs. 25,00,000/- by opposite party No. 2 and his relatives, however, the attempts of settlement at the instance of the parents of the petitioner No. 1 proved futile. The opposite party No. 2 and his relatives maintained their demand, and finally, the couple separated w.e.f. 8th April, 2019. Since the date of separation, the petitioner No. 1 alongwith children is residing with her parents and is single-handedly taking care of them. At times, she takes leave, which results deduction in her monthly salary. As per the pleadings, the opposite party No. 2 is a hale and hearty person, who is running a business in the name of Laxmi Plastics at 487, Peera Garhi, New Delhi as well as at A-81, Sector-4, Bawana Industrial Area, New Delhi and is having an income of Rs. 1,50,000/- per month. The opposite party No. 2 has a house consisting of three storeys and ground floor has been rented out for Rs. 20,000/- per month. That apart, two shops situated at Kishanganj Gaushala also fetch Rs. 40,000/- monthly rental income. The mother of opposite party No. 2 is a Principal in a primary school and she is also drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 50,000/-. The opposite party No. 2 is having no other liability except to maintain his wife and children, whereas the petitioner No. 1 is unable to meet the expenses singly-handedly as the opposite party No. 2 has neglected the petitioners by refusing to fulfill his responsibilities. In the year 2019, the children were admitted in Pre-Nursery School and petitioner No. 1 incurred expenses of Rs. 30,400/-, besides other costs of books, stationary, conveyance etc. Similarly, in the year 2020, again the petitioner No. 1 incurred expenses for admission of the children in the nursery class. Lastly, she claimed a monthly