1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

O R D E R

(1)

S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 328/2005

(Smt. Tara Devi and Ors. Vs. Chandan Mal and Anr.)

(2)

S.B.CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 453/2005

(Chandan Mal Vs.

State of Rajasthan and Ors.)

Date of Order

:

20/07/2006

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R.PANWAR

Mr. C.P.Soni for Smt. Tara Devi and Ors.

Mr. Rakesh Arora for Chandan Mal.

Mr. Ashok Upadhyay, public prosecutor.

BY THE COURT:-

Both these criminal misc. petitions under Section 482

Cr.P.C., are directed against the order dated 09.2.2005 passed

by Sessions Judge, Pali (for short 'the revisional court'

hereinafter) in Criminal Revision No. 53/2004 filed by Chandan

Mal, the husband of petitioner No.1 Smt. Tara Devi and father of

petitioners No. 2 and 3 in Petition No.328/05. Since both the

petitions involve common question of law and facts between the

same parties and arise out of the same order, with the consent

of counsel for the parties, they are heard together and decided.

2

On an application filed by Smt. Tara Devi and Ors.,

under Section 125 Cr.P.C., by order dated 25.8.2004, the

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pali (for short 'the trial court'

hereinafter) in Criminal Misc. Case No.273/01 allowed the

application and granted monthly allowance of maintenance at the

rate of Rs. 1000/- per month in favour of Smt. Tara Devi and in

favour of two minors Vikas and Kumari Prinka at the rate of Rs.

1000/- each per month from the date of application i.e.

19.12.2001. This order came to be challenged by husband

Chandan Mal before the revisional court. The revisional court by

the order impugned has maintained the order passed by the trial

court to the extent granting monthly allowance of maintenance

in favour of wife Tara Devi by the trial court however, modified

the order of the trial court to the extent that the maintenance

allowance is payable from the date of order passed by the trial

court i.e. 25.8.2004 as also reduced the maintenance granted in

favour of minors Vikas and Kumari Prinka from Rs.1000/- per

month to Rs. 600/- per month that too from the date of order of

the trial court.

Aggrieved by the order of revisional Court, petitioner

wife Smt. Tara Devi and her minor son and daughter have filed

the instant criminal misc. Petition being S.B.Cr.Misc.Petition

No.328/05 and petitioner Chandanmal husband has filed petition

3

seeking reduction of maintenance allowance being S.B.Criminal

Misc. Petition No. 453/05.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

Carefully gone through the order passed by the revisional court

and by the trial court as also record of the trial court.

It is contended by learned counsel for petitioners

Tara Devi and ors. that the revisional court fell in error in

reducing the maintenance allowance granted in favour of minors

Vikas and Priyanka from Rs. 1000 to Rs. 600/- per month. It is

further contended that without assigning any reason, the order

of the trial court granting maintenance allowance from the date

of application, has been modified by the revisional court and it

has been ordered that the maintenance allowance is payable

from the date of order of the trial court.

Learned counsel appearing for non-petitioner

husband Chandan Mal submits that the petitioner is a teacher

Grade-III and according to the salary certificate on record, his

salary is Rs. 6000/- per month and therefore, the maintenance

granted in favour of petitioners Smt. Tara Devi and two minors is

on higher side.

I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival

4

submissions made by the counsel for the parties.

The trial court granted maintenance at the rate of Rs.

1000/- per month in favour of Smt. Tara Devi as also Rs. 1000/-

each per month in favour of two minors Vikas and Priyanka. So

far as two minors Vikas and Priyanka are concerned, they were

of 7 years and 3 years respectively at the time of