HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Revision No. 482 of 2025

05 August, 2025

Mohan Singh Mawri --Revisionist

Versus

Haripriya Mawri --Respondent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Siddhant Manral, learned

counsel for revisionist.

Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral)

By means of the present criminal revision, the

revisionist has put to challenge the judgment and order dated 02.07.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nainital in Criminal Case No.62 of 2023, Smt. Haripriya Mawri Vs. Mohan Singh Mawri, whereby, the learned Family Court allowed the application filed by the respondent under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. for

enhancing the maintenance amount granted earlier.

2. The facts of the case in nutshell are that the revisionist and respondent were got married on 15.01.1990 as per Hindu Rites and Rituals. Due to some marital discord between them, the revisionist filed a Case No.54 of 2009 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., which was decided by the learned Court vide its order dated 29.01.2011 and the revisionist was directed to pay maintenance amount of Rs.12,000/- per month to

respondent-wife.

3. Thereafter, in the year 2011, both the revisionist and the respondent against the said judgment and order, filed revision CRLR No.34 of 2011 and CRLR No.77 of 2011 respectively before this Court and a

Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.07.2018 dismissed the revision filed by the revisionist and allowed the revision filed by the respondent and enhanced the maintenance amount granted earlier to Rs.45,000/-, which was directed to be paid since

21.04.2011.

4. Now, again respondent had filed an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. in the Court of learned Family Judge, Nainital, for enhancement of maintenance amount, who vide its impugned judgment and order dated 02.07.2025 enhanced the maintenance amount to Rs.70,000/- per month to be paid on 10^th day of every month from the date of order. Thus, feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid, revisionist is before this Court.

5. Learned senior counsel for the revisionist submits that the learned Court below had allowed the application for enhanced maintenance preferred by the respondent-wife without taking note of the fact that the respondent has also been receiving recurring monetary benefits from rents from her various properties including commercial properties and has also received properties from her family and over and above that she is receiving regular maintenance of Rs.45,000/- from the revisionist and as such the enhancement of the maintenance by the learned Court below is wholly arbitrary and discriminatory. He further submits that the respondent is earning more than Rs.20,000/- per month from her service as an insurance agent and has received substantial amount by way of succession. Therefore, the revisionist should not be burdened to pay the enhanced maintenance, which would place him in a difficult position.

6. He further argues that the respondent has gained monetary benefits since the maintenance was already enhanced by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.07.2018 and the respondent received the enhanced amount of Rs.45,000/- w.e.f. 21.04.2011 and she in addition received immoveable properties from her parental side and as such, she herself has attained multiple sources of income, which has put her in a far enriched and suitable pedestal as compared to the revisionist, who only has salary to provide him everything and safeguard his life after retirement.

7. Learned senior counsel for the revisionist further argues that the amount of maintenance fixed for the wife shall be such as she can live in reasonable comfort considering her status and also that she does not feel handicapped in the course of life. At the same time, the amount so fixed cannot be excessive or extortionate. He submits that in the present case in hand, respondent abandoned the revisionist