Court emphasizes the responsibility of earning spouses regarding maintenance to dependents; educational status impacts financial obligations.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH th ON THE 16 OF JULY, 2025 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 4878 of 2024 NEHA DWIVEDI AND OTHERS Versus MANISH DWIVEDI Appearance:

Shri Umesh Sharma - Advocate for the petitioners.

ORDER This criminal revision under section 19(4) r/w section 438 &

442 of the BNSS , 2023 is preferred being aggrieved by the order dated 26.07.2024 in MJCR No.100/2021 by Principal Judge, Family Court, Shajapur whereby an amount of Rs.3,000/- per month in favour of petitioner no.1/wife and an amount of Rs.2,000/- per month in favour of petitioner no.2/daughter have been awarded under section 125 of the Cr.P.C, 1973 from the date of application i.e. 25.11.2021.

2. Facts in brief are that petitioner no.1 was married to respondent on 01.06.2015 and a child i.e. petitioner no.2 born to the couple on 29.03.2016. With the allegation of cruelty and neglecting Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR in maintaining the petitioners, an application under section 125 Cr.P.C, 1973 was filed on 25.11.2021 claiming maintenance of Rs.15,000/- to the petitioner no.1 and Rs.10,000/- to the petitioner no.2.

3. The application was opposed by the respondent/husband.

4. Trial court/Family Court recorded the finding in favour of revision petitioners but allowed the application partially and awarded the maintenance as mentioned in para-22 of the order. 5. Challenging the order, this revision petition is preferred on the ground that considering the inflation and cost of living, the amount is not sufficient to maintain two persons.

6. Despite service of notice, no one appeared for the respondent.

7. The Family Court, Shajapur has recorded the finding that petitioner no.1 is registered as an Advocate since 2011 but she is not a regular practitioner and she is not earning from the profession. No specific finding was recorded regarding the income of the husband/respondent. The only finding was that he is educated and passed the impugned order.

8. Perusal of the affidavit filed by the respondent/husband in compliance of Rajnesh vs. Neha - 2021 (2) SCC 324 discloses that in column 1(e) the respondent/husband has disclosed is education as Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR M.Tech. He disclosed that his parents are aged. It also disclosed that father is a pensioner. In column no.13 of the affidavit neither the income nor assets has been disclosed.

9. A person holding a masters degree in technical education has to bear the responsibility as is expected from a highly educated person. Accordingly, the Family Court, Shajapur committed error in estimating the needs of the revision petitioners. At least the needs of the growing child has to be taken into consideration while determining the maintenance. Accordingly, the order dated 26.07.2024 is modified and the maintenance of petitioner no.1 is enhanced from Rs.3,000/- per month to Rs.8,000/- per month and petitioner no.2 from Rs.2,000/- per month to Rs.7,000/- per month. The enhanced amount shall be payable from the date of application i.e. 25.11.2021.

10. The petition stands allowed to the extent indicated herein above.

11. Copy or order be sent to respondent for compliance.