Maintenance awards can be made under both the Family Courts Act and the domestic violence provisions, requiring consideration of previous awards.

ORDER

This criminal revision petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Perambra in M.C.No.86/2014 dated 27.12.2018 as well as the judgment by the Sessions Court, Kozhikode (for short 'the appellate court') in Crl.Appeal No.101/2019 dated 22.5.2020.

2. The revision petitioner is the husband. The 1st respondent is the wife. The marriage is not in dispute. Two children were born in the wedlock. Paternity also is not in dispute. The learned Magistrate awarded the monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- to the wife and Rs.1,500/- each to two children. The appellate court confirmed the said order. Challenging the order of the learned Magistrate and the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, this Crl.R.P.

has been preferred.

3. I have heard Sri.Zubair Pulikool, the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and Smt.T.V.Neema, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor.

4. The main crux of the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the Family Court has already awarded maintenance to the wife and children and the award of maintenance again by the learned Magistrate is unjustified. The learned counsel in support of his argument relied on the recent decision of the Supreme Court inRajnesh v. Neha and another [ (2021) 2 SCC 324 ].

5. As stated already, the status of the parties are not in dispute. There is no case for the revision petitioner that the 1st respondent is employed and is having any income to support her and children. Admittedly, the revision petitioner was employed in Gulf at the time of institution of the M.C. proceedings at the Magistrate court. The petitioner being the husband of the 1st respondent and father of the children is legally and morally bound to maintain them.

6. The Family Court has ordered maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- each to the wife and children. In addition, the learned Magistrate ordered the monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,500/- to the wife and Rs.1,500/- each to the children.

7. Going by the provisions of the Family Courts Act and Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (for short 'the D.V.Act'), the petition for maintenance is maintainable before both the forums. However, the learned Magistrate, while disposing of the petition under the D.V.Act, is bound to take into account the maintenance, if any, awarded by the Family Court. It is also the dictum laid down inRajnesh's case (supra). A reading of the impugned order would show that the learned Magistrate has taken into account the maintenance awarded by the Family Court. Hence, I find no irregularity or impropriety in the impugned order and judgment.

Accordingly, the Crl.R.P. is dismissed.