BHAVNABEN HARSHKUMAR PATTANI Vs. HARESHKUMAR JAYANTILAL PATTANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this revision application filed under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of Cr.P.C., the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the order dtd. 24/5/2022 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Dwarka in Criminal Appeal No.7 of 2022 whereby, the appeal preferred by the respondent herein was allowed and the order dtd. 4/3/2022 passed by the learned JMFC, Okhamandal in Criminal Misc. Application No.8 of 2020 granting monthly maintenance of Rs.40,000.00 to the applicant herein was modified to the extend that the amount of monthly maintenance was reduced to Rs.20,000.00 from Rs.40,000.00.

(2.) The facts in brief are that the marriage between the applicant and the respondent herein took place in the year 1991 and out of the wed-lock, two children were born, who are, presently, aged about 27 and 24 years. It is the say of the applicant that the respondent and his family members were causing mental and physical harassment to the applicant, on account of which she had to leave her matrimonial house on 4/11/2019. On 3/1/2020 the applicant preferred a complaint under Sec. 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (for short, "the Domestic Violence Act ") against the respondent herein before the Court of learned JMFC, Okha, which was numbered as Criminal Misc. Application No.8 of 2020. The applicant had also preferred an application under Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the same Magisterial Court, which was numbered as Criminal Misc. Application No.9 of 2020. The said application is reported to be pending. The applicant had also preferred an application before the Magisterial Court seeking registration of an FIR against the respondent for suppressing his income in the Affidavit tendered before the Court, which is also reported to be pending.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. V.V. Goswami appearing for the applicant-wife submitted that the applicant herein is aged about 53 years and is suffering from multiple ailments. The applicant has to rely upon her brother and her two children for her sustenance and on the other hand, the respondent herein was serving as a Deputy General Manager with Adani Power Ltd. and also owns several movable and immovable properties. His annual income is some where around Rs.32.00Lacs. However, the lower appellate Court completely lost sight of the aforesaid aspects of the case and reduced the monthly maintenance to Rs.20,000.00, which is erroneous and improper.