Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82445 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 16324 of 2025 Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed with following prayer :- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the Maintenance Case No. 59 of 2022 (Km. Anjil & another v. Arvind Kumar), P.S.- Mahoba, District- Mahoba as well as the order dated 22.04.2025 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Mahoba in Maintenance Case No. 59 of 2022 (Km. Anjil & another v. Arvind Kumar) under Section 127 of CrPC, whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Mahoba rejected the application of the applicant." 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is father of opposite party nos.2 and 3 and they have filed a case under Section 125 CrPC, wherein by judgement dated 31.08.2018 the opposite party nos.2 and 3 were granted interim maintenance @ Rs.3,000/- per month each. The applicant was regularly paying that maintenance. Later, the opposite party nos.2 and 3 have filed an application under Section 127 CrPC for enhancement of the maintenance amount. It was submitted that there was absolutely no change in the circumstances and thus, the said application under Section 127 CrPC was not maintainable. Applicant has preferred an application stating that the case under Section 127 CrPC was not maintainable but that application was rejected vide order dated 22.04.2025 and Family Court held that application under Section 127 CrPC is maintainable. Learned counsel has referred the case of Rakhi @ Rekha v. State of UP and Another [Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:45615] and submitted that as there was no change in the circumstances thus, the impugned order is against law and thus, liable to be set aside. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned order. 5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record. 6. The provisions of Section 127 CrPC provide that Magistrate is empowered to alter an order passed under Section 125 CrPC on the ground of change in the circumstances of the parties at the time an application is made to modify the original maintenance order. While seeking any kind of modification whether for enhancement or reduction of maintenance it must be shown that there has been a change in circumstances of either the husband or of the wife. The term 'change in circumstances' as referred to in Section 127(1) CrPC not only includes a change in the financial circumstances of the husband but may also include other circumstantial changes in the husband or wife's life which may have taken place since the time maintenance was first awarded. 7. Perusal of record shows that opposite party nos.2 and 3, who are minor daughters of applicant, were granted maintenance @ Rs.3,000/- per month each vide judgement and order dated 31.08.2018. It appears that the said application under Section 127 CrPC was filed in the year 2022 for enhancement of maintenance amount. Whether there has been any change of circumstances or not, that can only be decided by the Family Court on the basis of evidence led by the parties. It appears that evidence of opposite party nos.2 and 3 has already been recorded and case is pending at the stage of evidence of applicant. In case of Rakhi @ Rekha (supra), the Court has held that Section 127 CrPC provides for alteration of maintenance on the ground that circumstances have been changed since the order was passed. The said judgement does not provide any help to the applicant at this stage, in as much as whether there was any change or not, is yet to be decided by the Family Court. Here, it may also be observed that elapse of sufficient time after order of maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, is itself a ground for alteration of maintenance under Section 127 CrPC. 8. In view of these facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that impugned order is suffering from any material illegality or perversity. There is nothing to show that there has been any abuse of process of the Court or miscarriage of justice. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merit and thus, liable to be dismissed. 9. Accordingly, the application under Section 528 BNSS is hereby dismissed. Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Rama Kant Digitally signed by :- RAMA KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad