,. * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 28 + CRL.REV.P. 143/2008 NIDHI BISARIA & ANR. ..... Petitioners Petitioner No.1 in person . . versus SARVESH BISARIA ..... Respondent through Mr. R.S. Hegde, Advocate with Respondent in person. With Crl Rev P No ...... .... /2009 (to be numbered) arising out of Crl Rev 11/08/08 (transferred to this Court by Order dated 1.7.2008) V SARVESH BISARIA ..... Petitioner Through Mr. R.S. Hegde, Advocate with Petitioner in person. versus NIDHI BISARIA & ANR ..... Respondents Respondent No.1 in person. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR ORDER 0/o 08.04.2009 1. The chalhnge in these two petitions is to an order dated 4th January 2008 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate ('MM') in a case titled Nidhi Bisaria & Anr. V. Sarvesh Bisaria under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 ('CrPC'). Crl Rev P No. 143/2008 l Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified 2. By the said order the learned MM directed that the Respondent Sarvesh Bisaria would pay to the Petitioner No.2 child an amount of Rs.9,000/- per month as interim maintenance 1with effect from 24th May 2006 till the disposal of the petition and that the said amount will be paid by the 7th day of every calendar month by way of_money order or by depositing the same in the bank account of the Petitioner No.1 through whom the Petitioner No.2 claims. The prayer of the Petitioner No.1 for award of interim maintenance was rejected. 3. Aggrieved by the denial of interim maintenance the Petitioner No.1 has filed the present revision petition. She is also aggrieved by the restriction of interim maintenance payable to Petitioner No.2 to Rs.9,000/- per month. Respondent Sarvesh Bisaria has filed Crl Rev Petition No. 11108/08 challenging the impugned order to the extent it directs payment of interim maintenance to the son. By an order dated 1st July 2008 this Court transferred the said revision petition of Sarvesh Bisaria pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge to this Court. 4. The perusal of the impugned order shows that before the learned MM neither party filed any document in support of their respective averments. The learned MM had therefore to proceed on the basis of a relative assessment of the claims of either party. The learned MM took note of the statement made by the Petitioner No.1 that she is earning an income of Rs.8,500/- per month. However the expenses claimed by the Petitioners . ' Crl Rev P No. 143/2008 Pagel ofS were yet to be proved since that required the lead of evidence. Since no document was filed by either party, the amount of interim maintenance as determined was directed to be paid only to the Petitioner No.2. The learned MM noticed that Petitioner No.2 is a school-going child requiring specific . treatment for an ophthalmic problem. It was also noticed that no document had been filed concerning the medical and other expenses incurred by the Petitioner No.2. 5. At this stage it may noticed that this Court has by separate order in Criminal Revision Petition No. 87 of 2009 directed that the main petition under Section 125 CrPC itself be disposed of by the learned MM on or before 30th June 2009. Pursuant to the directions issued by this Court the Petitioner has already filed evidence by way of affidavit. Her cross- examination is to commence very shortly. 6. Considering the submissions made by Petitioner No.1 who appears in person and learned counsel for the Respondent, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order does not call for interference at this stage, particularly when the main petition under Section 125 CrPC itself is directed to be disposed of on or before 30th June 2009 and the evidence in the said petition is in progress. The contentions of both the parties in this petition are · kept open for being decided by the said court while finally disposing of the main petition under Section 125 CrPC. It is nevertheless clarified that no observations made by the learned MM in the impugned Crl Rev P No. 143/2008 Page 3 o/5 order will affect the final determination of the Petition under Section 125 CrPC which will be on an independent assessment of the evidence led by the parties. 7. This Court had in its order dated 1st July 2008 directed that the arrears of maintenance to the extent of 50% upto that date should be kept in a cumulative fixed deposit for a period of two years with a nationalized bank. The fixed deposit receipt was directed to be handed over by the Respondent to Petitioner No.1 who was to keep it in trust for Petitioner No.2 and not encash the same without permission of this Court. It is stated that in compliance of the said order the FDR had beeri handed over by Respondent to Petitioner No.1. 8. Since this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 4th January 2008 passed by the learned MM, the consequential direction required to be issued is that the amount held in FDR will now be released by the concerned Bank by way of a demand draft in the name of the Petitioner No.2 and will now be deposited in the savings account of Petitioner No.2. The Respondent will take the necessary steps to ensure that the above directions are complied with without any unnecessary delay. Although this may entail some loss of interest this consequential order is required to be passed since it pertains to the arrears payable in terms of the impugned order which has been affirmed by this judgment of the Court. Crl Rev P No. 143/2008 Page4of5 9. Learned counsel for the Respondent requests that the order dated I" July ( 2008 passed by mutual consent permitting the Respondent to meet his son on three Saturdays in every month, should be continued. Petitioner No.1 states that she has no objection to this request. Accordingly, the arrangement put in place by the order dated 1st July 2008 regarding visitation by Respondent to his son will continue. 10. Petitioner No.1 will furnish to Respondent or his counsel the details of bank account number of Petitioner No.2 within two days from today. 11. The petitions are disposed of. APRIL 08, 2009 rk Crl Rev P No. 143/2008 S.MURALIDHAR, J PageS o/5