DIPAK SAHA RAY,J. - (1.) THE present case arises out of an application under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) IT is directed against the Order dated 21.5.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Barrackpore, North 24 Paraganas in Criminal Revision No. 123 of 2011 modifying the Order dated 26.3.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barrackpore in Misc. Case No. 12 of 2001 under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure arising out of Misc. Case No. 171 of 1990 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The relevant facts of the present case are, in a nutshell, as follows: The present petitioner/wife initiated a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against her husband/Opposite Party No. 2 herein for her maintenance as well as for the maintenance of her children. The said proceeding was registered as Misc. Case No. 171 of 1990. In the said Misc. Case, the learned Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barrackpore on 23.11.1995 allowed the prayer for maintenance of the petitioner and the husband was directed to pay Rs. 300/- p.m. to the petitioner and also Rs. 300/- each p.m. for her minor sons as maintenance. Subsequently, the petitioner/wife filed an application under the provisions of Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for enhancement of the maintenance so passed by the learned Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barrackpore on 23.11.95 and the said case was registered as Misc. Case No. 12 of 2001. The said case was allowed in part on 26.3.2010 and the maintenance of Rs. 300/- p.m. which was allowed previously on 23.11.1995 in favour of the petitioner/wife, was enhanced to Rs. 2500/- p.m.; but the prayer for maintenance in respect of the sons of the petitioner was rejected as the said sons in the mean time became major.
(3.) BEING aggrieved by the said order of enhancement of maintenance, the husband/opposite party No. 2 herein filed a revisional application which was registered as Criminal Revision No. 123 of 2010 and in the said case the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.II, Barrackpore, North 24 Paraganas has modified the order dated 26.3.2010 by the order dated 21.5.2011 directing the husband/opposite party No. 2 to pay the maintenance of Rs. 900/- p.m. to the petitioner/wife instead of Rs. 2500/- p.m. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 21.5.2011, the petitioner/wife has preferred the instant revisional application. The grievances of the petitioner/wife are, in short, as follows: The learned trial court failed to appreciate the judgment of the learned Magistrate in the matter of enhancement of maintenance in its proper perspective and approached the case from a wrong angle and this has resulted in failure of justice. The learned trial court without assigning any reason whatsoever modified the order dated 26.3.2010 though the learned Magistrate in the said order assigned the reasons why the previous amount of maintenance was enhanced. The learned trial court without considering the income of the husband and status of the parties reduced the amount of maintenance.;