KAPIL KUMAR MOHAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In M.P. Case No.61 of 2012, the learned Family Court Judge has awarded Rs.11,000/- per month as monthly allowance to the applicant-wife. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an application under section 127 Cr.P.C for reducing the amount of maintenance to Rs.2,000/-. The application under section 127 Cr.P.C has been dismissed by an order dated 19.11.2015.

(2.) Section 127 Cr.P.C provides that if it is proved that the circumstances which were prevailing at the time when an order under section 125 Cr.P.C for the maintenance or interim maintenance was passed, the Magistrate may make such alteration as he thinks fit in the allowances of the maintenance or the interim maintenance, as the case may be. Under section 127 Cr.P.C, the Magistrate has been given wide powers - he can cancel the order or may vary the order - but the necessary condition under section 127 is that there should be a proved change in the circumstance.

(3.) In his application under section 127 Cr.P.C, the petitioner has stated that he was an employee when the order for maintenance was passed and now he has superannuated from service. His wife has retained the official accommodation given to him by M/s Bokaro Steel Plant and on account of unauthorised occupation of the accommodation his employer has retained the gratuity amount. He has filed an application dated 30.11.2013 for a direction to M/s BSP for releasing the gratuity amount; now it has been released. The petitioner has taken a plea that he is suffering from heart disease and he had undergone heart surgery for which he had to incur huge expenses and he has to look after his handicapped son also. But, nowhere in his application under section 127 Cr.P.C he has disclosed the expenses incurred on his treatment, the post-retiral benefits received by him or the amount of his pension.