IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL CRIMINAL CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1145 OF 2001. WRIT PETITION NO.1145 OF 2001. WRIT PETITION NO.1145 OF 2001. Shri Sonba Tukaram Ransing. ..Petitioner. versus 1. Sou. Chhabubai Sonba Ransing. 2. Kumari Akka Sonba Ransing. 3. The Government of Maharashtra. ..Respondents. .... Mr. S.P.Kadam, for the Petitioner. Mr. Sunil Kadam, for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. D.P.Adsule, APP, for the Respondent-State. .... CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. : A.S. OKA, J. DATE DATE DATE : 30TH JULY,2008. : 30TH JULY,2008. : 30TH JULY,2008. ORAL ORAL ORAL JUDGMENT : JUDGMENT : JUDGMENT : 1. The submissions of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties were heard on the last date. It must be noted here that a mediator was appointed by this Court with a view to resolve the dispute between the Petitioner -husband and the first Respondent-wife. The learned mediator has submitted a report dated 11th June 2007 setting out the efforts made by him. He has noted that the mediation has failed. Accordingly, the Writ Petition was taken up for hearing. 2. With a view to appreciate the submissions - 2 - made by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it will be necessary to refer to the facts of the case in brief. The first and the second Respondents applied under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Code") for grant of maintenance. By order dated 15th December 1980, the said Application made by the first and the second Respondents was partly allowed and the Petitioner was directed to make payment of maintenance at the rate of Rs.100/- per month to the second Respondent. The prayer for maintenance made by the first Respondent was rejected. A Revision Application was filed by the first and the second Respondents. By order dated 13th July 2001, the Revision Application was allowed. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune directed the Petitioner to pay maintenance of Rs.750/- per month to the first Respondent-wife and maintenance of Rs.500/- per month to the second Respondent-daughter. The maintenance was made payable from the date of the original application. 3. The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner-husband invited my attention to the - 3 - findings recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the impugned order dated 13th July 2001. He also invited my attention to the notes of evidence. He pointed out that the Petitioner had since retired and he was getting a meagre pension of Rs.3,400/- per month. He invited my attention to an order passed by the Civil Court in the civil suit filed by the first and the second Respondents. He pointed out that by order dated 9th April 2001, the learned Fourth Joint Civil Judge directed the Petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.700/- per month to the first Respondent and Rs.300/- per month to the second Respondent. He pointed out that while fixing the quantum of maintenance, the order of the Civil Court has not been considered by the learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge especially when the said order was passed prior to the date on which the Revision Application was decided on 13th July 2001. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the first and the second Respondents not only supported the impugned Judgment and Order of the Sessions Court but submitted that a very meagre amount by way of maintenance have been awarded by the learned Sessions - 4 - Judge and the said amount deserve to be enhanced. 5. I have carefully considered the submissions. The finding of the learned Additional Sessions Judge is that the Petitioner was holding the landed property and was taking crops. However, the certified copy of the 7/12 extract did not show that the Petitioner was taking any irrigated crop. The learned Judge found that prior to the retirement, the gross salary of the Petitioner was Rs.16,020/- per month and after all deductions, he was getting salary of Rs.7,422/- per month. As pointed out earlier, the total amount of maintenance awarded by the learned Sessions Judge is Rs.1,250/- per month. In this Writ Petition a contention was sought to be raised that the Petitioner is getting monthly pension of only Rs.3,400/-. Even if the said amount is taken into consideration, in view of findings recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the Petitioner was holding the landed property, the total maintenance amount fixed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the year 2001 appears to be reasonable. - 5 - 6. It must be clarified here that while making the payment of amount of the maintenance payable under the impugned Judgment and Order, the Petitioner will be entitled to adjust the amounts paid by him to the first and the second Respondents under the order of the Civil Court dated 19th April 2001 in the Special Summary Suit No.209/2000 in as much as the learned Additional Sessions Judge has not taken into consideration the order of the Civil Court while fixing the interim maintenance. 7. So far as the prayer made by the learned Counsel for the first and the second Respondents is concerned, the same cannot be granted as the said Respondents have not filed any Petition. In case of change in circumstances, the first and the second Respondents can always apply under section 127 of the said Code for variation of the maintenance amount. 8. Hence, I pass the following order :- (1) The impugned Judgment and Order dated 13th July 2008 is confirmed. However, the maintenance payable by the Petitioner under - 6 - the said order will be inclusive of the amount payable by the Petitioner as per the order of the Civil Court dated 9th April 2001 in Special Summary Suit No.209/2000. (2) This order will not preclude the first and the second Respondents from filing appropriate proceedings. (3) Criminal Application No.2996/2002 and No.3161/2003 as well as Criminal Application No.1548/2002 will not survive and the same are disposed of. [ A.S.OKA, J.] A.S.OKA, J.] A.S.OKA, J.]