Criminal Misc. No.M-35146 of 2010 (O&M) 1 In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No.M-35146 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision: 1.12.2010 Viney Kumar ......Petitioner Versus Saksham .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr.Rahul Vats, Advocate, for the petitioner. **** SABINA, J. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C. for short) for quashing of order dated 19.11.2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari (Annexure P-1) and order dated 30.9.2010 passed by the Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar (Annexure P-2), whereby interim maintenance of ` 1,000/- per month was allowed to the respondent. Heard. Respondent had filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance. It was submitted that the respondent was the illegitimate son of the petitioner. The petitioner was earning ` 50,000/- per month and had failed to maintain the respondent. The trial Court vide impugned order dated 19.11.2009 Criminal Misc. No.M-35146 of 2010 (O&M) 2 (Annexure P-1) allowed ` 1,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the respondent by taking the income of the petitioner as ` 3,500- 5,000/- per month. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner filed a revision petition and the same was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge vide order dated 30.9.2010 (Annexure P-2). Learned Sessions Judge, in para 9 of the impugned order has held as under:- “After hearing the arguments of both the sides and going through the case file, it is undisputed that Charanpreet Kaur @ Preety is maintaining her two children from her late husband Sushil Kumar besides maintaining herself, therefore, it is difficult for her to maintain Saksham as well particularly when he is the son of revisionist Vinay Kumar even if he was his illegitimate child. If it is admitted that the revisionist was not having any property movable or immovable, even then it cannot be said that he was not an earning hand. Even a casual labourer these days earns ` 3,600/- per month. So the amount of ` 1,000/- as maintenance pendente lite to his minor school going son cannot be said to be excess or on higher side in any manner. Thus, no fault can be found in the impunged order passed by the learned Magistrate.” Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been incorporated in the Code to provide speedy maintenance to the deserted wives, children and Criminal Misc. No.M-35146 of 2010 (O&M) 3 parents and save them from vagrancy. The said provision has social object to achieve. The respondent is the son of the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is bound to maintain his minor son though illegitimate. The amount of interim maintenance allowed by the Courts below cannot be said to be in the higher side in these days of high prices. Moreover, the amount has been allowed only by way of interim arrangement. No ground for interference by this Court is made out. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. (SABINA) JUDGE December 01, 2010 anita