IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 247 PARAMJIT SINGH SUKHRAJ KAUR CORAM: HON’BLE M Present : Mr None for the respondent. KIRTI SINGH 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 14.07.2017 (Annexure P Judge, Amritsar vide which the criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 397 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 02.11.2016 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned 2. Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the petitioner and the respondent solemnized on 13.02.1998 and out of was born out on 28.01.2000. ensued between the parties application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. 16.07.1999, wherein under, on the basis of by the learned 04.05.2002. After a lapse of more than 15 years, i.e. on IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M Date of decision: PARAMJIT SINGH Versus SUKHRAJ KAUR HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE KIRTI SINGH Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent. **** KIRTI SINGH, J. (oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 14.07.2017 (Annexure P Judge, Amritsar vide which the criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 397 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 02.11.2016 (Annexure 2) passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar has been dismissed. Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the petitioner and the respondent solemnized on 13.02.1998 and out of was born out on 28.01.2000. Owing to the ensued between the parties, they started living separately under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed by the respondent 9, wherein under, maintenance of Rs.450/ on the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar vide order dated After a lapse of more than 15 years, i.e. on IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH M No.30760 of 2017 (O&M) Date of decision: 05.08.2025 …. Petitioner …. Respondent KIRTI SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 14.07.2017 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide which the criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 397 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 02.11.2016 (Annexure Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar has been dismissed. Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the petitioner and the respondent solemnized on 13.02.1998 and out of said wedlock, one child matrimonial discord that had they started living separately, whereafter an was filed by the respondent on maintenance of Rs.450/- per month was awarded, settlement arrived at between the parties before the Lok Adalat, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar vide order dated After a lapse of more than 15 years, i.e. on 24.03.2015, subsequent The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for 1) passed by learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide which the criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner under Section 397 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 02.11.2016 (Annexure Brief facts of the case are that marriage between the petitioner and said wedlock, one child cord that had , whereafter an on , , Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar vide order dated subsequent Jyoti 2025.08.12 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. enhancement of The same was allowed on 02.11.2016 and maintenance Rs.3,000/- per month challenged the same in a revision petition, Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 14.07.2017. the petitioner has preferred the instant petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted trial Court committed a grave error while enhancing the amount of maintenance from Rs.450/ fact the amount of maintenance of Rs.450/ the basis of settleme the petitioner had been submitted that the learned Court also failed to duly appreciate the fact that during the pendency of application for e petitioner-husband was pursuant to conviction under Section 494 IPC. The fact that the parties had been embroiled in litigation for more than 16 years, as also the contention the petitioner was taking care of his aged parents, was also disregarded by the learned Court while passing the impugned order. 4. The object and purpose behind granting maintenance is to ensure that the dependent spouse vagrancy on account of failure of marriage the maintenance proceedings while being alive to the legislative intent behind CRM-M No.30760 of 2017 under Section 127 Cr.P.C. was moved by the respondent, seeking enhancement of the maintenance awarded to her vide order dated 04.05.2002. The same was allowed on 02.11.2016 and maintenance per month, from the date of filing of the challenged the same in a revision petition, which was dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 14.07.2017. the petitioner has preferred the instant petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted trial Court committed a grave error while enhancing the amount of maintenance from Rs.450/- to Rs.3,000/- per month and failed to appreciate the fact the amount of maintenance of Rs.450/- per month the basis of settlement arrived at between the parties before Lok Adalat had been regularly paying to the respondent submitted that the learned Court also failed to duly appreciate the fact that uring the pendency of application for enhancement of mai husband was in custody, serving his one year imprisonment pursuant to conviction under Section 494 IPC. The fact that the parties had been embroiled in litigation for more than 16 years, as also the contention the petitioner was taking care of his aged parents, was also disregarded by the learned Court while passing the impugned order. The object and purpose behind granting maintenance is to ensure that the dependent spouse and children are vagrancy on account of failure of marriage. The Courts are required to conduct the maintenance proceedings while being alive to the legislative intent behind M No.30760 of 2017 -2- moved by the respondent, seeking awarded to her vide order dated 04.05.2002. The same was allowed on 02.11.2016 and maintenance was enhanced to filing of the application. The petitioner which was dismissed by learned Sessions Judge, Amritsar vide order dated 14.07.2017.Aggrieved by the same, Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the learned trial Court committed a grave error while enhancing the amount of per month and failed to appreciate the per month had been awarded on nt arrived at between the parties before Lok Adalat, which regularly paying to the respondent-wife. It is further submitted that the learned Court also failed to duly appreciate the fact that nhancement of maintenance, the in custody, serving his one year imprisonment pursuant to conviction under Section 494 IPC. The fact that the parties had been embroiled in litigation for more than 16 years, as also the contention that the petitioner was taking care of his aged parents, was also disregarded by the learned Court while passing the impugned order. The object and purpose behind granting maintenance is to ensure not reduced to destitution or The Courts are required to conduct the maintenance proceedings while being alive to the legislative intent behind moved by the respondent, seeking awarded to her vide order dated 04.05.2002. was enhanced to petitioner which was dismissed by learned Aggrieved by the same, that the learned trial Court committed a grave error while enhancing the amount of per month and failed to appreciate the on which It is further submitted that the learned Court also failed to duly appreciate the fact that , the in custody, serving his one year imprisonment pursuant to conviction under Section 494 IPC. The fact that the parties had that the petitioner was taking care of his aged parents, was also disregarded by the The object and purpose behind granting maintenance is to ensure to destitution or The Courts are required to conduct the maintenance proceedings while being alive to the legislative intent behind Jyoti 2025.08.12 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM the provision under Section 125 Cr.P.C in its true spirit, which is to provide speedy assistance and social justice to women, children and infirm parents. The provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. were enacted as a measure to further social justice and protect dependent women, children and parents, which also fall within the constitution Constitution of India their actual respective earning capacities in order for the Court to arrive at quantum of maintenance which is just and f equistatus. The quantum of maintenance must be justifiable and realistic to provide succour to the dependent spouse and also to avoid occurrence of the two extremes of the maintenance being either paltry or extravagant, ensurin that neither of the two is reduced to a life of penury. The adequacy of the maintenance allowance has to be determined by the yardstick of the dependent spouse and children 5. A perusal of the impugned or Judge, Amritsar material placed before it at the time of deciding the enhancement of the application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was decided, more than 13 years had elapsed, during which time cost of living had increased manifold. Furthermore, the son of the parties, who had been in the care and custody of his mother, was aged n enhancement application was moved. The factum of the husband having performed a second marriage during the subsistence of his marriage with the CRM-M No.30760 of 2017 the provision under Section 125 Cr.P.C in its true spirit, which is to provide speedy assistance and social justice to women, children and infirm parents. The provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. were enacted as a measure to further social justice and protect dependent women, children and parents, which also fall within the constitutional sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India. The rival claimants must scrupulously bring on record their actual respective earning capacities in order for the Court to arrive at quantum of maintenance which is just and f equistatus. The quantum of maintenance must be justifiable and realistic to provide succour to the dependent spouse and also to avoid occurrence of the two extremes of the maintenance being either paltry or extravagant, ensurin that neither of the two is reduced to a life of penury. The adequacy of the maintenance allowance has to be determined by the yardstick of the dependent and children being able to lead a life of reasonable comfort. A perusal of the impugned order passed by the learned Judge, Amritsar makes it evident that the Court ha material placed before it at the time of deciding the enhancement of maintenance. It was recorded therein that from the time when application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was decided, more than 13 years had elapsed, during which time cost of living had increased manifold. Furthermore, the son of the parties, who had been in the care and custody of his mother, was aged near about 17 years when the subsequent enhancement application was moved. The factum of the husband having performed a second marriage during the subsistence of his marriage with the M No.30760 of 2017 -3- the provision under Section 125 Cr.P.C in its true spirit, which is to provide speedy assistance and social justice to women, children and infirm parents. The provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. were enacted as a measure to further social justice and protect dependent women, children and parents, which also fall al sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the The rival claimants must scrupulously bring on record their actual respective earning capacities in order for the Court to arrive at quantum of maintenance which is just and fair in terms of principle of equistatus. The quantum of maintenance must be justifiable and realistic to provide succour to the dependent spouse and also to avoid occurrence of the two extremes of the maintenance being either paltry or extravagant, ensuring that neither of the two is reduced to a life of penury. The adequacy of the maintenance allowance has to be determined by the yardstick of the dependent being able to lead a life of reasonable comfort. der passed by the learned Sessions makes it evident that the Court had duly considered the material placed before it at the time of deciding the application for It was recorded therein that from the time when application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was decided, more than 13 years had elapsed, during which time cost of living had increased manifold. Furthermore, the son of the parties, who had been in the care and ear about 17 years when the subsequent enhancement application was moved. The factum of the husband having performed a second marriage during the subsistence of his marriage with the the provision under Section 125 Cr.P.C in its true spirit, which is to provide speedy assistance and social justice to women, children and infirm parents. The provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. were enacted as a measure to further social justice and protect dependent women, children and parents, which also fall al sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the The rival claimants must scrupulously bring on record their actual respective earning capacities in order for the Court to arrive at air in terms of principle of equistatus. The quantum of maintenance must be justifiable and realistic to provide succour to the dependent spouse and also to avoid occurrence of the g that neither of the two is reduced to a life of penury. The adequacy of the maintenance allowance has to be determined by the yardstick of the dependent Sessions duly considered the for It was recorded therein that from the time when application for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was decided, more than 13 years had elapsed, during which time cost of living had increased manifold. Furthermore, the son of the parties, who had been in the care and ear about 17 years when the subsequent enhancement application was moved. The factum of the husband having performed a second marriage during the subsistence of his marriage with the Jyoti 2025.08.12 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM respondent, was inferred by the Court sufficient income that he could even maintain his second wife. Thereafter view of the husband being an able bodied man, the quantum of maintenance was thereafter fixed by the learned Court by assessing his minimum income as being at least Rs.300 to Rs.400 per day, in the absence of certain proof of his income. Learned coun perversity in the impugned order which warrants interference by this Court. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed being bereft of any merit. 6. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, disposed of. 05.08.2025 Jyoti-IV CRM-M No.30760 of 2017 respondent, was inferred by the Court to the effect that the husband had sufficient income that he could even maintain his second wife. Thereafter view of the husband being an able bodied man, the quantum of maintenance was thereafter fixed by the learned Court by assessing his minimum income as being at least Rs.300 to Rs.400 per day, in the absence of certain proof of his Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to indicate any perversity in the impugned order which warrants interference by this Court. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed being bereft of any merit. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, (KIRTI SINGH Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No. Whether reportable : Yes/No M No.30760 of 2017 -4- to the effect that the husband had sufficient income that he could even maintain his second wife. Thereafter, in view of the husband being an able bodied man, the quantum of maintenance was thereafter fixed by the learned Court by assessing his minimum income as being at least Rs.300 to Rs.400 per day, in the absence of certain proof of his sel for the petitioner has not been able to indicate any perversity in the impugned order which warrants interference by this Court. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed being bereft of any merit. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand(s) KIRTI SINGH ) JUDGE Yes/No. Yes/No to the effect that the husband had , in view of the husband being an able bodied man, the quantum of maintenance was thereafter fixed by the learned Court by assessing his minimum income as being at least Rs.300 to Rs.400 per day, in the absence of certain proof of his sel for the petitioner has not been able to indicate any perversity in the impugned order which warrants interference by this Court. also stand(s) Jyoti 2025.08.12 10:06 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document