1 REVN476.10.sxw JPP IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION REVISION APPLICATION NO. 476 OF 2010 Mr. Muzaffar Hussain Ansari. ... Applicant. V/s. Mrs.Rukhsana @ Misba Muzaffar Ansari & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. Jayant Gaikwad for the Applicant. Ms. Dolly Mendonca for Respondent 1. Mrs. M.M. Deshmukh, APP for State. CORAM : R.Y. GANOO, J. DATED : 16th MARCH 2011. P.C. :- The Respondent herein had filed Petition No. E-367 of 2009 for maintenance against the Petitioner under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The learned Judge of the Family Court has on the Interim application No. 172 of 2009 at Exhibit 5 passed an order dated 2nd August 2010 directing the Petitioner to pay to the Respondent a sum of Rs.3,000/- by way of an interim maintenance from the date of the application i.e. 28th July 2009. The Petitioner – husband has filed this Petition so as to challenge the said order. 2. I have heard learned Counsels on both sides at the stage of admission of this Petition. The Respondent had made 2 REVN476.10.sxw specific averment that the Petitioner is having three shops and he is getting substantial rent from the said shops. The learned Judge of the Family Court has considered this aspect. The Petitioner claims that he has been working in a private firm as a labour supervisor and he is earning a sum of Rs. 5,000/-. The Petitioner has produced a certificate in the nature of salary certificate. 3. The Petitioner has not come out before the Court to say as regards his other assets. In the normal course he should have produced his bank pass-book in order to throw light on his financial turn-over. The Petitioner claims that he has a mother and sister to be taken care of. The Petitioner’s responsibility to take care of the Respondent – wife also has to be considered. The learned Judge of the Family Court has considered entire record and has properly arrived at the figure of interim maintenance. 4. In my view, in the peculiar facts this is not a case where this Court should interfere and pass any order in favour of the Petitioner. Needless to mention that if the Petitioner steps into the witness box and gives complete account of his financial affairs, the learned Judge should appreciate that position and pass an order in favour of the Petitioner. 5. For the reasons mentioned aforesaid, I do not wish to interfere in the order impugned. Hence, following order is passed :- 3 REVN476.10.sxw (i) The Revision Application is dismissed at the stage of admission with no order as to costs. (ii) The learned Judge of the Family Court is directed to hear and dispose of the Petition as expeditiously as possible and preferably by 31st December 2011. (R.Y. GANOO, J.)