(1.) The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for modifying the impugned order dated 14.12.2015, whereby the inadequate interim maintenance of Rs. 2500/- per month has been allowed.
(2.) In brief, a marriage between the parties was solemnized on 16.01.2013 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies, which relationship could not survive the test of time. Resultantly, an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. along with application for interim maintenance, came to be filed by the petitioner-wife with the allegations that the respondent-husband and his family members were not satisfied with the dowry articles and they started harassing, humiliating and torturing the petitioner-wife, on account of demand of more dowry. In her application, the petitioner-wife claimed the earning of the respondent-husband more than Rs. 50,000/- per month and prayed that she be allowed monthly maintenance @ Rs. 30,000/- per month, along with litigation expenses. In reply, the respondent-husband denied the allegations as levelled by the petitioner-wife and claimed that the petitioner wife is working as a receptionist at a monthly salary of Rs. 10,000/- per month. By the impugned order dated 14.12015, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Classt, Karnal, allowed the interim maintenance @ Rs. 2500/- per month from the date of the application, apart from litigation expenses of Rs. 1000/-. The said order was challenged in revision by the petitioner-wife, but the same came to be dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, on the ground of maintainability.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the respondenthusband is living a luxurious life, whereas the petitioner-wife is living on the mercy of her old aged parents. It is submitted that the respondenthusband and his famly is having their own residential house and further having 3 commercial properties within the Municipal Corporation, Taraori. It is argued that the respondent-husband and his family members are running a showroom of shoes in Taraori, but all these facts were not considered, while assessing the amount of interim maintenance.