Mr. Sandeep Mehta, J. - (1.) By way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner Sandeep Vyas has approached this Court for challenging the order dated 20.1.2016 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bhilwara in appeal whereby the appellate court dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 29.7.2013 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Bhilwara allowing the application preferred by the respondent under Section 23 of Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act and directing the petitioner to make payment of interim maintenance @ Rs. 2000/- per month to the respondent as well as minor child of the petitioner and the respondent.
(2.) Shri Nitin Trivedi learned counsel representing the petitioner drew the Court's attention to the order dated 7.2.2015 passed by learned Family Court, Bhilwara in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby, Smt. Renu and Dheeraj being the wife and minor child of the petitioner were awarded maintenance @ Rs. 1500/- per month and Rs. 2500/- per month respectively. Shri Trivedi urged that ex-facie, from the material available on record, the award of maintenance to the respondent Smt. Renu is not justified because the lady upon being examined in evidence admitted that she was earning a sum of Rs. 10,000/- per month. He contends that as per the salary slip placed on record of the proceedings, the petitioner is drawing a meager sum of Rs. 4500/- per month and thus, it would be impossible for him to pay total maintenance of Rs. 8000/- per month to the respondent wife and the minor child. He thus urges that the order of maintenance should be suitably modified.
(3.) Shri Chundawat learned counsel representing the respondent vehemently opposed the submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel and tried to buttress that as a matter of fact, the admission regarding the income of the respondent as appearing in her sworn statement appears to be a result of typographical error. As per Shri Chundawat, it is impossible to believe that by doing sundry job of tailoring, the respondent would be able to earn Rs. 10,000/- per month. He thus implored the Court to reject the instant misc. petition.;