Under Section 125(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, courts possess the discretion to award maintenance from the date of the order or the application. However, this discretion must be exercised judiciously, and absent exceptional circumstances, it is appropriate to award maintenance from the date of the application.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. By way of present application, applicant has sought the following reliefs:

“A) YOURLORDSHIPS may be pleased to call the record and proceeding from the Ld. Family Court, Ahmedabad, and modify the impugned order dtd.29.04.2023, passed by Ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No. 1550/2015, by enhancing the amount of maintenance awarded in the interest of Justice;

B) YOURLORDSHIPS may be pleased to modify the order dated 29.04.2023, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family court Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No.1550/2015 by awarding the amount of maintenance from the date of filing of the application u/s. 125 of the Cr.P.C. (19.06.2015) in the interest of justice.”

2. The case of the applicant is that the marriage of Applicant No. 1 with the respondent was solemnized on 29.04.2007, and out of the said wedlock, Applicant No. 2, namely Harshit, was born on 05.07.2008. It is the case of the applicants that in April 2013, they were driven out of the matrimonial home by the respondent without any justifiable reason and were left without any means of livelihood. Consequently, the applicants preferred an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 19.06.2015 before the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad, seeking maintenance of Rs. 12,000/- per month for Applicant No. 1 and Rs. 8,000/- per month for Applicant No. 2. Upon completion of evidence and after hearing both sides, the learned Family Court partly allowed Criminal Misc. Application No. 1550 of 2015 vide order dated 29.04.2023, awarding maintenance of Rs. 5,500/- per month to Applicant No. 1 and Rs. 5,000/- per month to Applicant No. 2 from the date of the order. Being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the maintenance so awarded, the applicants have preferred the present revision application seeking enhancement of the said amount.

3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

4. Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court is unjust, unreasonable, and contrary to the evidence on record, and therefore deserves to be quashed and modified. It is contended that the learned Court below has erred in awarding a meagre amount of maintenance of Rs. 5,500/- per month to Applicant No. 1 and Rs. 5,000/- per month to Applicant No. 2, which is grossly inadequate considering the financial status and income of the respondent, who is earning approximately Rs. 50,000/- per month as per the income tax return for the year 2020–21. It is further submitted that the applicants were driven out of the matrimonial home in the year 2013 and are presently dependent upon the aged and retired father of Applicant No. 1, who sustains them from his limited pension. The learned advocate emphasized that Applicant No. 2 is a school-going child, and the expenses towards education, including school fees, books, uniforms, and other necessities, far exceed the amount awarded. It is also argued that the learned Family Court has failed to properly appreciate the documentary evidence on record and has not considered the additional sources of income of the respondent. Moreover, the Court below has committed an error in awarding maintenance from the date of the order inste