- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THIS revision petition under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.01.2013 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, No. 15, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur(hereinafter referred to as 'the Appellate Court ") in Criminal Appeal No. 17/2012, whereby the appeal of the appellant-petitioner filed under Section 29 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2005') was partly allowed modifying the order dated 23.02.2011 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge(Junior Division) and Metropolitan Magistrate, No. 20, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur(hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court') in Case No. 137/2009, whereby learned Trial Court awarded interim maintenance of Rs. 500/- to the petitioner from the date of order with certain other directions. Learned Appellate Court modified the order passed by the learned Trial Court and enhanced the amount of interim maintenance allowance from Rs. 500/- per month to Rs. 3,000/- per month. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court, so far as it relates to quantum of the maintenance, is absolutely unjustified and unreasonable and liable to be modified by way of enhancement up to the tune of Rs. 7,500/- per month. The learned Appellate Court failed to appreciate the admitted fact that respondent is retired Government servant and petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. At the time of retirement the respondent was getting Rs. 12,850/- as basic pay and other allowance and after retirement the pay of the respondent has also been revised as per the recommendations of Sixth Pay Commission and at present the respondent is getting around Rs. 15,000/- per month pension and the petitioner is entitled for half of the pension being sole dependent member of the respondent. Besides pension, the respondent is also involved in the share marketing business and considering the status of the respondent, interim maintenance allowance awarded by the Appellate Court is on lower side. In support of his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of V.D. Bhanot Vs. Savita Bhanot, 2012 Cr.L.R.(SC) 105.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the respondent left the matter to the discretion of the Court.;