- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:5360 CRL.RP No. 672 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 672 OF 2024 BETWEEN: 1. SMT. SRIDEVI MANJUNATH W/O MANJUNATH M,M AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/AT NO.67, COCONUT AVENUE ROAD 8TH CROSS, MALLESHWARAM BANGALORE – 560 003. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SURESH CHOTTEYANDA S., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. SRI. MANJUNATH M., S/O MUDALAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, R/AT NO.103 (OLD NO.9) 8TH CROSS ROAD, MALLESHWLARAM DATTATREYA TEMPLE, BANGALORE – 560 003. …RESPONDENT (BY SRI. SARAVANA S., ADVOCATE) THIS CRL.RP IS FILED UNDER SECTION 397 R/W 401 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED LXIX ADDL. CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE (CCH- 70) AT BANGALORE CITY AT BANGALORE IN CRL.A.NO.720/2023 DATED 27.07.2023 ORDERED TO PAY Digitally signed by DEVIKA M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:5360 CRL.RP No. 672 of 2024 RS.25,000/- PER MONTH, AND TO SET ASIDE THE INTERIM MAINTAINENACE ORDER PASSED BY THE IV METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE TRAFFIC COURT AT BANGALORE IN CRL.MISC.NO.92/2022 DATED 26.04.2023 AND ORDERED TO PAY SUM OF RS.30,000/- PER MONTH ALONG WITH EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES OF PETITIONER TWO DAUGHTERS; AND TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY SUM OF RS.1,10,000/- PER MONTH TO PETITIONER ALONG WITH TWO DAUGHTERS AND ALLOW THE INTERIM MAINTENANCE APPLICATION, AND TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT TO PAY SUM OF RS.1,10,000/- ALONG WITH EDUCATIONAL EXPENSES OF TWO DAUGHTERS TO PETITIONERS. THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The present revision petition is filed against the order passed in Crl.A.No.720/2023, wherein compensation awarded before the Trial Court was reduced to Rs.25,000/- from Rs.30,000/-. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:5360 CRL.RP No. 672 of 2024 3. On perusal of the order of the Trial Court, it is seen that interim-maintenance was passed for an amount of Rs.30,000/-, till final disposal and further ordered that the respondent has to pay entire school fees of both the children and observed that above interim-maintenance amount shall be adjustable to the amount, if any, the petitioner is getting towards maintenance from the respondent from any other proceedings and also directed to pay interim maintenance amount by 10th of each English Calendar month. The same is modified by the Appellate Court by reducing the same to Rs.25,000/-. 4. The Appellate Court while reducing the same to Rs.25,000/- has given the reason that the Trial Court has not considered the quantum of income tax that would be payable by the appellant herein which would be rounded off to the tune of 30%. If that is taken, the order passed by the Trial Court awarding maintenance to the tune of Rs.30,000/- would be on higher side and even, failed to take note of what is the income tax of the appellant and while modifying such order, nothing is discussed in the order and the order passed by the Appellate Court is noting but a callous order and without placing any - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:5360 CRL.RP No. 672 of 2024 document with regard to payment of income tax at 30%, such observation made by the Appellate Court is erroneous. 5. While passing the order, the Trial Court also comes to the conclusion that, considering the document produced by the respondent, he is getting salary of Rs.1,93,850/- and the same is also not discussed by the Appellate Court order, except making an observation that he has to pay the income tax at 30% and no document is placed with regard to whether he is paying income tax at 30% or lesser. Hence, the order passed by the Appellate Court requires interference. 6. Therefore, the respondent herein is directed to continue to pay the maintenance of Rs.30,000/- as ordered by the Trial Court and also directed to pay the entire school fees of both the children as observed by the Trial Court and order of the Trial Court is restored. The Trial Court is directed to decide the matter on merits considering the income of the respondent as well as considering the fact that the petitioner-wife is admittedly drawing the salary of Rs.16,000/- and also comply with the directions of the Apex Court in RAJNESH VS. NEHA - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:5360 CRL.RP No. 672 of 2024 reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324 while determining the quantum of compensation on merits. With these observation, criminal revision petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (H.P.SANDESH) JUDGE ST List No.: 1 Sl No.: 21