BHOPAL RAM PUROHIT Vs. GEETA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner herein is aggrieved of the order dtd. 6/4/2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Abu Road, Distt. Sirohi in Criminal Appeal No.05/2023, vide which the appeal was dismissed. The order challenged before the learned Sessions Court is the order dtd. 21/2/2023 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Abu Road in Criminal Misc. Case No.234/2022, whereby the application for maintenance under Sec. 23 of the Domestic Violence Act, filed by the respondent-wife was allowed and learned trial court granted maintenance of Rs.4,000.00 each (Total Rs.8,000.00) for two minor children. Since the learned trial court did not mention the date from which the interim maintenance was to be paid, the respondent-wife filed an application, which was allowed vide order dtd. 2/12/2023 and interim maintenance was ordered to be paid from the date of filing of application.

(2.) Heard

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial court could not have reviewed its own order. The learned trial court has committed error while reviewing its order and fixed the date of granting maintenance from the date of filing of application instead of from the date of order i.e. 21/2/2023. He has placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court rendered in the cases of Hari Singh Mann Vs. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa and Ors. : AIR 2001 SC 43 and Atul Shukla Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr. : SLP (Crl.) 1166 of 2019, decided on 6/5/2019.