HARBANS SINGH Vs. PARAMJIT KAUR ALIAS BHOONDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HARBANS Singh has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the modification of the order dated May 14, 1929 passed by Additional District Judge, Faridkot and order September 4, 1990 passed by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Faridkot Annexure P-1 and P-2 respectively. Paramjit Kaur filed an application for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against her husband Harbans Singh. She was allowed maintenance amount of Rs. 125/- per month vide order dated October 26, 1983. She then moved an application for enhancement of the maintenance allowance under Section 127 of the Code, alleging that it was difficult for her to make her both ends meet with a meagre amount of Rs. 125/- per month on account of increase in the prices of the commodities. The claim of wife was resisted by the husband but her application was allowed and the amount of maintenance was enhanced from Rs. 125/- per month to Rs. 400/- per month from the date of the application.

(2.) AGAINST the order whereby the amount of maintenance was enhanced both the parties filed Revision Petitions. The learned Additional District Judge Faridkot found that the order of the trial Court was quite legal and thus dismissed both the petitions.

(3.) THE petitioner has not assailed the findings of the courts below regarding enhancement of maintenance amount from Rs. 125/- per month to Rs. 400/- per month but the learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that the wife who claimed enhancement in the maintenance allowance had not established any circumstance to claim the amount with retrospective effect, nor the courts below had recorded any reasons for making the order operative from the date of the application, more so when in the revision claim of the wife for enhanced maintenance from the date of application was specifically assailed. It was urged that even under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where the Court has the discretion to order payment of the maintenance, allowance from the date of the order or from the date of the application for maintenance reasons are required to be recorded but under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure no date is specified from which the order is to take effect. So special circumstances were required to be shown for claiming enhanced amount from the date of the application. In support of his contention learned Counsel placed reliance on the case of Krishma v. Dharam Raj, 1991(3) Recent Criminal Reports 145. In this case while dealing with the question whether it is essential to record reasons if the allowance is made payable from the date of the application which implies reason need not be recorded if the same is allowed from the date of the order. It was observed :-