- (1.) petitioner has preferred the revision under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the judgement and order dated March 17, 2015 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Redesignated Court, Paschim Medinipur in Criminal Revision No. 369 of 2014 arising out of an order dated 05.06.2014 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Paschim Medinipur in connection with M. R. Case No. 212 of 2013, by which the petitioner was directed to make payment of interim maintenance @Rs.5,000/- per month and Rs.5,000/- as lump sum litigation cost from the date of filing of the application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the trial court.
(2.) It appears from the materials on record that the opposite party/wife started maintenance proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner/husband before the trial court on June 21, 2013. It further appears from record that on June 5, 2014 learned Judicial Magistrate directed the petitioner/husband to make payment of interim maintenance @Rs. 2,000/- per month and Rs.2,000/- as litigation cost from the date of passing of the order, i.e., June 5, 2014. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before the Court of Sessions and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Re-designated Court, Paschim Medinipur disposed of the Criminal Revision No.369 of 2014 on March 17, 2015 by enhancing the amount of maintenance from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.5,000/- per month and by enhancing the cost of litigation from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.5,000/- . Learned Additional Sessions directed the petitioner/husband to make payment of interim maintenance @Rs.5,000/- per month in favour of the opposite party/wife with effect from the date of filing of the application and also the litigation cost @Rs.5,000/-.
(3.) Mr. Mitra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner/husband contends that the opposite party/wife is not the legally married wife of the petitioner/husband and that the claim of maintenance is made by the opposite party long after 25 years. However, Mr. Mitra, concedes that the petitioner/husband is an employee of the Indian Railways and he earns gross salary of about Rs.30,000/- per month. Mr. Mitra also submits that learned Additional Sessions Judge has enhanced the amount of interim maintenance though no prayer was made by the opposite party/wife by filing any revision for enhancement of the amount of interim maintenance before the Court of Sessions.;