1 revn472-10.sxw pps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Revision Application No. 472 of 2010 . Mr.Abdul Gafar Abdul Hamid Tamboli .. Applicant v/s. Mrs. Afreen Bano Abdul Gafar Tamboli & Others ..Defendants Mr.L.S.Gaikwad for the Applicant Mr.P.R.Kadam with Mr. J.D.Khairnar for the respondent nos.1 to 3 Mrs.M.M.Deshmukh, APP for the State CORAM : R.Y.GANOO, J. DATED : 15th March, 2011 P.C. : 1. The respondents herein applied for maintenance against the petitioner by filing proceeding P.E.No.412 of 2007 before the learned Judge at Family Court, Pune. The learned Judge of the Family Court by detailed order dated 29.7.2010 decided the said application for maintenance and directed the petitioner to pay to respondent Rs. 5000/- for her maintenance and Rs.3000/- and Rs.2000/- respectively 2 revn472-10.sxw for the two children. This order dated 29.7.2010 is challenged by this criminal revision application. 2. I have heard learned Counsels on both sides at the stage of admission of his criminal revision application. Learned Counsel Mr.Gaikwad submitted that the amount of maintenance arrived at by the learned Judge of the Family Court is on higher side. He submitted that the petitioner is running the business of Tarpauline sheets near Masjid Railway Station. He submitted that his income is hardly Rs.5000/- per month. The learned Judge of the Family Court has considered the evidence which was placed before him. Initially the petitioner had stated that he was working in a shop, however, now the petitioner claims that he is carrying on the business as mentioned aforesaid. If it was the case of the petitioner that his income is Rs.5000/- or so per month, either by way of job or by way of his business, he could have produced necessary material or he could have examined some of his business friends similarly placed, who would have given some evidence to show what would be the income of the person selling Tarpauline material. The learned Judge of the Family Court was impressed by the fact that the petitioner has been visiting the foreign 3 revn472-10.sxw countries. Today, before the Court, the learned Counsel for the petitioner upon instructions made a staement that the petitioner does not hold any passport as of today. He also submitted that only three trips were made by the petitioner. However, he has not explained at whose cost the petitioner had gone abroad. The Court could take judicial notice of the fact that going abroad is not just going to Pune or Nashik, as the case may be where one can go by spending nominal amount. This will mean that the petitioner is having sufficient means to visit foreign countries, and at the same time he is exposing his wife and children to day to day hardships. If he has gone to foreign countries for a business, it would mean that he is earning money and he is avoiding to pay maintenance. In the absence of the positive figure coming from the petitioner as regards his income, the learned Judge has appreciated the evidence and has rightly arrived at the income of the petitioner. The total amount of maintenance granted is to the tune of Rs.10,000/-. Respondent is required to take care of herself as well as two young children and as such the learned Judge has arrived at a proper figure of maintenance, ofcourse by taking into consideration the income of the petitioner. 4 revn472-10.sxw 3. In my view, this is not a case where this Court should interfere and admit this revision. For the reasons mentioned aforesaid the revision is dismissed at the stage of admission. [R.Y.GANOO, J.]