SUDHASHREE JENA @ BISWAL Vs. SATYABRATA BISWAL & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This common order shall dispose of the two aforesaid criminal revisions since in both the cases the judgment dated 17th June,2017 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Cuttack in Criminal Appeal No.47 of 2017 has been assailed.

(2.) The said appeal was preferred by the petitioner in Criminal Revision No.416 of 2017 assailing the order dated 15.03.2017 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Cuttack in D.V.Misc. Case 352 of 2016 granting interim maintenance of Rs.2000/- to her and Rs.1,000/- to her child on her application under Section 23 of the P.W.D.V.Act. She alleged that the amount awarded was extremely low. On hearing the parties the learned Sessions Judge by the impugned order dated 17.06.2017 directed the opposite party no.1 to pay Rs.8500/- per month towards her maintenance and education of her child as an interim measure till disposal of the D.V.Misc. Case. She has now filed the Criminal Revision No.416 of 2017 assailing the said order with the submissions that considering the income and status of the opposite parties, the amount awarded by the learned appellate court, is also grossly inadequate and needs to be enhanced. The other Criminal Revision No.560 of 2017 has been filed by one petitioner who happened to be the husband of the aggrieved party. It has been submitted on behalf of the husband that without considering the material facts and actual take home salary of the husband, learned appellate court has fixed the amount at a much higher side which the petitioner is unable to pay.

(3.) Learned counsel for both the sides were heard at length. The copy of the salary certificate as filed on behalf of the husband in Criminal Revision No.560 of 2017 is not in dispute. As per the said certificate, the gross salary of the petitioner-husband is Rs.45,764.97 per month and after deduction his net salary is Rs.21,260/-. It was submitted on behalf of the petitioner-husband that the learned trial court after considering the pleadings and submissions of both the parties had awarded an amount of Rs.3000/- per month as an interim maintenance but the learned Appellate Court, without considering the submissions made on behalf of the husband that he has dependent old parents and the fact that the opposite party-wife is also earning, has passed the impugned order directing to pay a monthly amount of Rs.8,500/- which would put the husband-petitioner to serious difficulty.