MONICA Vs. VIKAS SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order dated 10.05.2005, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, granting a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month as interim maintenance to the petitioner till further orders. This was without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. The petitioner is aggrieved by this order inasmuch as, according to her, this amounts to a pittance compared to the financial status and standing of the respondent.

(2.) It is true that there is an ongoing dispute, which will ultimately be settled in the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C, which is pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, after evidence is led and parties are heard. However, at this stage, the court has to take a prima facie view looking at the material on record and considering the financial status of the parties. Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is a provision whereby maintenance is granted to family members, including wives as a measure to prevent their vagrancy. It is part of the Code of Criminal Procedure and is clearly distinct and different from the provisions of personal law of civil nature governing the parties. It has specifically been made a part of the Code of Criminal Procedure because the state is interested in seeing that its citizens are not subjected to conditions which would result in their vagrancy. As observed by the Supreme Court in Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat: (2005) 3 SCC 636:- "9. The provision is enacted for social justice and specially to protect women and children as also old and infirm poor parents and falls within the constitutional sweep of Article 15 (3) reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution. The provision gives effect to the natural and fundamental duty of a man to maintain his wife, children and parents so long as they are unable to maintain themselves. Its provisions are applicable and enforceable whatever m ay be the personal law by which the persons concerned are governed."

(3.) While a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month may be sufficient for some individuals considering their financial status, it may be thoroughly inadequate for others, who have the wherewithal to pay much higher quantums of maintenance. At this stage, which is merely an interim stage, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate was required to consider the material on record to come to a conclusion to provide maintenance as an interim measure to the petitioner, who is the wife of the respondent. Although, some of the submissions of the parties have been mentioned in the impugned order, unfortunately, the order granting interim maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month, has been passed, in the words used by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, "without going into the merits of the case". The Metropolitan Magistrate was required to take a prima facie view on the basis of the material placed on record.