IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA (Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction)

Appellate Side Present:

Justice Bibhas Ranjan De C.R.R. 770 of 2024 Tumpa Basak Vs.

Tufan Basak With CRR 472 of 2024 Tufan Basak Vs.

Tumpa Basak For the Petitioner in CRR 770 :Mr. Avik Ghatak, Adv.

of 2024 & for the opposite party Ms. Afreen Begum, Adv.

in CRR 472 of 2024 Ms. Swastika Chowdhury, Adv.

For the Opposite Party in CRR 770 :Mr. Asit Baran Raut, Adv.

of 2024 & for the Petitioner Ms. Ishita Raut, Adv.

in CRR 472 of 2024 Mr. Tuhin Subhra Raut, Adv.

Mr. Atul Basak, Adv.

Last Heard on :24.06.2025 Judgment on :18.07.2025 Bibhas Ranjan De, J.

1. Both the revision applications challenging the impugned order are hereby consolidated and taken up for disposal through this singular, comprehensive judgment.

2. The revision application being no. 770 of 2024 has been preferred by the wife/petitioner assailing the order dated 30.12.2023 passed by Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 5^th Court, Barackpore, North 24 Parganas in connection with Misc. Case no. 22 of 2022 under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter CrPC), wherein Ld. Magistrate reduced the quantum of maintenance from the tune of Rs. 30,000/- granted in disposing an application under Section 125 of the CrPC to the tune of Rs. 20,000/-

per month, with effect from the date of the order impugned.

3. Whereas, the revision application being no. 472 of 2024 has been preferred by the husband/ petitioner assailing the same order dated 30.12.2023 with a prayer for further reduction in the quantum of maintenance from the tune of Rs. 20,000/- and also with respect to date of effect which should be from the date of retirement of the estranged husband.

Background Fact:-

4. Both the parties to the revision applications were married and a male child was born out of the wedlock. In the wake of a distressing matrimonial discord, petitioner initiated proceedings under Section 125 CrPC for maintenance, which was disposed of by promulgating an order of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- per month in favour of the petitioner/wife.

5. Considering the changed circumstances i.e. retirement of the opposite party /husband, one application under Section 127 CrPC was filed by the husband for seeking reduction of the maintenance which was also disposed of by an order thereby reducing the maintenance to the tune of Rs.20,000/- per month.

6. The wife preferred the revision application being no. CRR 770 of 2024 assailing the order of reduction of maintenance and husband also challenged the same order in the revision application CRR 472 of 2024 with a prayer for further reduction of the amount and with date of effect being from the date of retirement.

At the bar:-

7. Ms. Afreen Begum, Ld. Counsel, appearing on behalf of the Petitioner in respect of CRR 770 of 2024 & the opposite party in respect of CRR 472 of 2024 has mainly canvassed her argument on the settled principle of law that maintenance is not charity but a legal obligation of the husband. In this regard, Ld. Counsel by relying on some of the celebrated decisions of the Hon’ble Apex Court, has strenuously argued that the husband’s attempt to evade maintenance by suppressing his actual earnings and thereby claiming a meager salary is non-est in the eye of law as maintenance should actually reflect the dignity and standard of living that the wife was accustomed to during marriage, keeping in mind the concept of equi status

8. Before parting with, Ld. Counsel has tried to make this court understand that although the impugned order dated 30.12. 2023 recorded findings to the effect that the opposite party obtains his wages through separate means in terms of Share Market, Provident Fund, Gratuity, Leave encashment etc. but still went on to reduce the quantum of maintenance. Moreover, the Ld. Trial Judge also did not consider the angle of retirement benefits which the opposite party was entitled to being a retired High Level Banking Official in addition to the factual position that the opposite