Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. must consider the minor's needs and the financial means of the respondent, while interest on maintenance awards is not permissible.

ORDER

This revision is filed by the respondent in MC No.395 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam. It is a case filed by the respondent herein under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent was admittedly dissolved. The 1st respondent born in their legal wedlock on 28.05.2005. It is the case of the respondents that the petitioner abandoned the respondents since 16.04.2015. Thereafter, the 1st respondent was looked after solely by the 2nd respondent mother. As on the date of institution of the petition, the 1st respondent minor girl was studying in the 8th Standard in Bhavans Vidya Mandhir, Elamakkara. The petitioner is working as a Supervisor in Maersk Oil, Doha Quatar, a multi national company since 2009 is the submission of the respondents. It is the case of the respondents that the petitioner draws a monthly income of Rs.5 lakh. The minor child requires Rs.25,000/- per month towards her needs and requirements including educational expenses. Hence, the case was filed claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs.25,000/- per month to the minor child.

3. MC No.395 of 2018 and OP No.2535 of 2018 were considered together by the Family Court and a common judgment were delivered. To substantiate the case, revision petitioner was examined as RW1 and the 2nd respondent was examined as PW1. Exts.A1 to A12 are the exhibits marked on the side of the respondents and Exts.B1 to B4 are the exhibits marked on the side of the revision petitioner. After going through the evidence and documents, the Family Court allowed MC No.395 of 2018 directing the respondent to pay a sum of Rs.20,000/- per month from the date of petition to the 1st respondent with 6% interest. Aggrieved by the same, this revision is filed.

4. Heard counsel for the revision petitioner and the counsel appearing for the respondents.

5. When this revision petition came up for consideration on

05.04.2023, this Court passed the following order:

“Learned counsel for the respondents points out that huge amount is in arrears towards maintenance allowance. It is also pointed out that the child is in 12th standard and is in dire need of money for education and other expenses.

In such circumstances, there shall be an interim stay of further proceedings based on M.C.No.395/2018 of the Family Court, Ernakulam for two months, subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees Four Lakhs only) within one month.

If the amount is deposited, the same shall forthwith be released to the respondents. If the amount is not deposited within one month, the Family Court can continue with the coercive proceedings. Post on reopening week.”

6. Thereafter, when the matter came up for consideration on

05.06.2023, this Court passed the following order:

“Learned Counsel for the respondents points out that, depsite this Court’s direction that the petitioner should pay Rs.4,00,000/- towards arrears of maintenance, payment was made through the account of a stranger. It is also submitted that on the earlier occasion also, the remittance was made through the account of a stranger and the respondent had raised an objection before the bank.

2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner tried to justify the action by pointing out that the payment was effected from the account of petitioner’s mother-in-law, since the petitioner is abroad. According to the Counsel, no objection was raised by the respondent when remittance were made through that account earlier.

I find substance in the objection raised by the respondents, since this Court had specifically directed the petitioner to make the payment. The petitioner having flauted the direction by remitting Rs.6,00,000/- through a stranger’s account, extension of the interim order is made subject to the petitioner himself remitting/paying a further amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) within one month.

The interim order is extended by two months, subject to the above condition.”

7. Thereafter, the revision petitioner submitt