SCR.A/849/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION No. 849 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= RAJENDRASINH PAHADSINH SOLANKI - Applicant(s) Versus MINOR JAYSHREEBEN RAJENDRASINHSOLANKI THROUGH HER GUARDIAN & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR AD DESAI for Applicant(s) : 1,MR BHADRESH C PATEL for Applicant(s) : 1, RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1, MR HRIDAY BUCH for Respondent(s) : 1, Mr. L.R.Poojari,A.P.P for Respondent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA Date : 17/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner husband has called into question the order dated 01.05.2006 of learned Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar SCR.A/849/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT in Criminal Revision Application No. 112 of 2004 whereby the amount of maintenance payable to his daughter was increased from Rs. 400/- p.m. to Rs. 2,000/- p.m. There being no time limit for payment of maintenance and the amount having been claimed to be on the higher side, it was urged by learned counsel Mr. A.D.Desai, appearing for the petitioner, that appropriate order in terms of the provisions of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was required to be made and the impugned order was required to be modified. Learned counsel Mr. Hriday Buchh, appearing for the respondent, fairly conceded that the order for maintenance of the daughter cannot be for an indefinite period, particularly in the facts of the present case when the daughter has admittedly attained the age of maturity on 23.06.2007. It was, however, submitted by him that in view of the fixed and other income of the petitioner, as a Government Servant, the order of payment of Rs.2,000/- may be justified in view of the constant increase in the cost of living. 2. Accordingly, the petition is partly allowed and the impugned order is modified to the extent that the petitioner shall be required to pay to respondent no.1, the amount of monthly allowance by way of maintenance @ Rs.2,000/- for the period from 01.05.2003 to 30.06.2007. The amount already paid pursuant to the earlier orders shall be adjusted against the amount which may now be payable by this order. Rule is made absolute to that extent. Interim relief granted earlier stands vacated. SCR.A/849/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT 3. It was stated by learned counsel Mr. Desai that the total amount due shall be paid by the petitioner in three installments latest by 30.03.2009. sd/- (D.H.WAGHELA,J.) Jyoti