Back
2019 Supreme(MP) 552
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
S.K. Awasthi, J.
Juhi Chawla v. Gangandeep Singh
Criminal Revision No. 4432 of 2019(I); Decided on 12.12.2019
Shri Vishal Shrivastava for applicant; Ms. Poorva Mahajan for respondent.
Headnote:
Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 125, proviso II, 125(5) and 127 -- application for grant of maintenance pending -- Magistrate can grant reasonable interim maintanance and expenses of such proceedings -- not required to record evidence -- applicant granted interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month -- interim maintenance amount is not final amount -- it can be redetermind while deciding application under section 125 -- application filed by respondent for alteration of allowance was premature -- trial Court committed error in reducing interim maintenance amount -- respondent/husband directed to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 15,000/- per month to applicant/wife. [Paras 7 & 9]
naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 125] ijarqd 2] 125¼5½ rFkk 127 & Hkj.k&iks"k.k Ánku fd, tkus ds fy, vkosnu yafcr & eftLVªsV ;qfDr;qDr varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k rFkk ,slh dk;Zokgh ds fy, O;; Ánku dj ldrk gS & lk{; vfHkfyf[kr fd;k tkuk vkisf{kr ugha & vkosfndk dks #i;s 15]000@& Áfrekl varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k Ánku fd;k x;k & varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k dh jde vafre jde ugha gS & /kkjk 125 ds v/khu vkosnu dk fofuf'p; djrs le; ;g iqu% vo/kkfjr dh tk ldrh gS & HkRrs esa ifjorZu ds fy, ÁR;FkhZ }kjk Qkby vkosnu le;iwoZ Fkk & fopkj.k U;k;ky; us varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k dh jde ?kVkdj xyrh dh gS & ÁR;FkhZ varfje Hkj.k&iks"k.k #i;s 15]000@& Áfrekl vkosfndk@iRuh ds lank; djus ds fy, funsf'krA ¼iSjk 7 ,oa 9½
ORDER
1. This criminal revision filed under section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 is directed against order dated 4.8.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Indore in Criminal MJC No. 121/2017, in which the application filed by the respondent under section 125(5) of the CrPC read with section 127 of the CrPC has been allowed and earlier interim maintenance amount granted to the applicant to the tune of Rs. 15,000/- per month, vide order dated 7.12.2018 has been reduced to Rs. 7,500/- and subsequently Rs. 5,500/- per month.
2. The necessary facts for the disposal of the instant petition are that the applicant is a legally wedded wife of the respondent and she is residing separately with the respondent regarding which the allegation of the applicant is that the respondent was persistently making demand of dowry and ill treated her, therefore, she was forced to leave her matrimonial house. Then applicant has filed an application for grant of maintenance from the respondent under section 125 of the CrPC. The said application is still pending. During the pendency of the proceedings, the applicant filed an application for grant of interim maintenance. After hearing the parties, the trial Court by order dated 7.12.2018 awarded interim maintenance to the respondent to the tune of Rs. 15,000/- per month.
3. During pendency of the case, respondent filed an application under section 127 of the CrPC seeking alternation in interim maintenance allowance by contending that he is not having financial condition to pay Rs. 7,500/- per month to the applicant as interim maintenance. He has also filed the copy of income tax return of the year 2016-2017 to 2018-2019, according to which his annual income is Rs. 1,55,380/- and submitted that he could not file the aforesaid documents earlier before the trial Court. The respondent also preferred Criminal Revision No. 6145/2018 before this Court against order dated 7.12.2018, which was dismissed by this Court, vide order dated 19.3.2019 granting liberty to the respondent to file an application under section 127 of the CrPC before the trial Court. After that, considering the income tax return of the respondents, the trial Court has reduced the interim maintenance amount from Rs. 15,000/- per month to Rs. 7,500/- per month from 7.12.2018 to 4.8.2019 and then Rs. 5,500/- per month from 5.8.2019 to till disposal of the case, vide order dated 14.8.2019. This order is a subject matter of challenge in the present revision petition.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that according to provision of section 127 of the CrPC any order made under such provision is effective from the date of order of such application and the trial Court has committed error of law by allowing the application of the respondent from 7.12.2018 i.e. from the order of interim maintenance. It is also submitted that the criminal Court is not having any power to review its own order, therefore, the trial Court has also committed error in reducing the interim maintenance amount. It is further submitted that during the pendency of petition under section 125 of the CrPC, respondent moved an application under section 127 of the CrPC before the learned trial Court for modification of the amount of interim maintenance and the trial Court without affording opportunity to lead evidence to both the parties, reduced the interim maintenance amount, therefore, the impugned order suffers from illegality and impropriety, hence, is liable to be set aside.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant opposed the prayer by contending that the trial Court can modify its own order regarding grant of interim maintenance, therefore, it cannot be said that the trial Court review its own order. It is also submitted that after considering the income of the respondent, the trial Court has reduced the interim maintenance amount and this order is peremptory and does n
