1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Writ Petition No. 508 of 2011 Shri. Ankush s/o Anant Pusadkar V/s. Sau. Mrunali w/o Ankush Pusadkar and another ........................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ........................................................................................................................................... Mr. A. R. Wagh, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. R. J. Mirza, Advocate for the Respondents No.1 & 2 CORAM : A. P. BHANGALE, J. DATE : 22ND NOVEMBER, 2011. 1. Heard Mr. A. R. Wagh, learned Advocate for the Petitioner and Mr. R. J. Mirza, learned Advocate for the Respondents No. 1 & 2. 2. The petitioner is challenging an order dated 11/07/2011, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Amravati in Petition E-125/2010, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay interim maintenance to his wife Mrunali and son Parth in the sum of Rs. 6,000/- and, Rs. 3,500/- per month, respectively, with effect from 2 25/05/2011, so also expenses in the sum of Rs. 5,000/- to his wife for the proceedings. Learned Advocate for the petitioner states, that the impugned order was passed ex-parte for grant of interim maintenance soon after the mediation has failed. According to learned Advocate for the petitioner, the wife of the petitioner is conducting private tuition and earning for herself and; so also she is assisting her friend who runs beauty parlour, therefore, he is not liable to pay maintainence to his wife. 3. According to learned advocate for the respondents, petitioner has already challenged ex-parte order by moving an application for setting aside the same and his application is pending. Furthermore, it is contended that under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, even order for maintenance may be varied or altered on proof of a change in the circumstances of any person, receiving, monthly allowance or interim maintenance. Under these circumstances, when there is alterate remedy available under Section 127(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, writ petition ought not to be entertained. 3 4. I have perused provision of Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding alteration even interim maintenance which may be altered on proof of a change in the circumstances of any person, if according to the petitioner, his wife is having income from tuition classes or assisting in a beauty parlour, as alleged. The learned Principal Judge of the Family Court may be moved accordingly with evidence as to change in the circumstances of person, receiving interim maintenance. 5. In view of this legal position, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. Petition is dismissed. JUDGE Punde