MD.ASLAM ANSARI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Over an application filed under Section 125, Cr.P.C. on behalf of the opposite party No. 2, a sum of Rs. 600 was awarded vide order dated 21.8.2006 passed in M-79/04 to the opposite party No. 2 to be paid by the petitioner, as maintenance. In the year 2008, an application was filed under Section 127(1), Cr.P.C. stating therein that the opposite party No. 2 has grown older and has developed several kinds of diseases, as a result of which, a sum of Rs. 600 proves to be inadequate for her livelihood. On such application, without there being any evidence with respect to increase in income of the petitioner, an order was passed enhancing the amount of maintenance from Rs. 600 to Rs. 2,500 per month, on the ground that by the passage of time of two years, there has been price escalation. That order was challenged before revisional Court and the revisional Court vide order dated 8.4.2009, affirmed the order passed by learned Magistrate under Section 127, Cr.P.C. Those orders are under challenged.

(2.) Mr. N.K. Prasad, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the opposite party No. 2 had been awarded maintenance of Rs. 600 per month in the year 2006, but the same was enhanced to Rs. 2,500 in the year 2008, without there being any evidence to the effect that there has been increased in the income of this petitioner, as such order passed under Section 127, Cr.P.C. suffers from illegality. This aspect of the matter was also not considered by the revisional Court and, therefore, both the orders are fit to be set aside.

(3.) Admittedly, the amount of maintenance of Rs. 600 was enhanced to Rs. 2,500 per month, without there being any evidence of increase in the income of the petitioner. Enhancement was made, taking into account the fact that by the passage of time, there has been escalation in the price of things.