SUBRATA MUKHOPADHYAY Vs. AMRITA MUKHOPADHYAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN March 2007 in a criminal revision a co -ordinate bench of this court enhanced the amount of maintenance from Rs.1050/ to Rs.1200/ - per month directed to be paid by the petitioner to the wife/opposite party. Subsequently, sometime in the middle of 2010 the wife/opposite party moved the court below an application under section 127 CrPC for enhancement of maintenance. The said application was allowed and by the impugned order amount of maintenance was enhanced from Rs.1200/ - to Rs.1400/ - per month. This criminal revision arises out of the said order.

(2.) THE learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/husband submitted that the petitioner/husband was directed to pay maintenance in connection with proceedings under section 125 CrPC as well as under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

(3.) HE further submitted that the petitioner/husband is a junior member of the Bar and, therefore, if he is required to pay both the maintenance pendentelite as well as the maintenance in terms of the impugned order that would cause great hardship to him. Therefore, the order of enhancement of maintenance be quashed.