2025:JHHC:20386 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 474 of 2025 Shahnaz Bano, W/o Akhtar Ansari, R/o Digwadih Majhi Basti no-10, P.S.- Jorapokhar, P.O. Jelgarah, District-Dhanbad ..... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Akhtar Ansari, S/o Ahmed Miya, R/o Bhelatand Colony Q. No.-A.S.-7, P.O. Bhelatand, P.S.-Jogta, District-Dhanbad … …. Opp. Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner : Mr. Shadab Ansari, Advocate Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, APP ------ Order No. 04 / Dated : 24.07.2025. 1. The petitioner is the first wife of opposite party no. 2, who had filed Maintenance Alteration Case No. 61/2023 for enhancement of her maintenance which was earlier ordered to Rs.8,000/- per month. By the impugned order, the maintenance was increased from Rs.8,000/- to Rs.9,000/- per month. 2. The instant revision petition has been filed for enhancement of the maintenance amount. 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that opposite party no. 2 was working in the Tata Company, Sijua with gross salary of Rs.1,19,345/-. Earlier his monthly income was Rs.98,000/- which was enhanced to Rs.1,19,345/- on which an application for enhancement of the maintenance amount under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. was filed. 4. As per the case of the petitioner, she has four children from the wedlock from opposite party no. 2 and thereafter she was divorced and opposite party no. 2 solemnized the second marriage under the Mohammadan Law and is presently living with his second wife and four children. 5. It is argued by learned counsel that the maintenance amount is meagre and is not sufficient to maintain herself. She is also undergoing treatment for skin disease and is also living in a rented house and is paying Rs.5000/- as rent. 6. The notice was earlier issued to opposite party no. 2 which was duly served to him but he did not appear either in person or through counsel to contest the revision petition. 2025:JHHC:20386 7. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that admittedly opposite party no. 2 has to maintain his second wife and four children. Further, after deduction, he receives only Rs.66,942/- as salary. Considering this aspect, only Rs.9000/- has been awarded to the petitioner as maintenance. 8. Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, it is evident that the gross salary of opposite party no. 2 was Rs.1,19,345/-. All the deductions, which have been made, cannot be considered for computation of income of opposite party no. 2. At present, tax exemption from the income is upto Rs.12 Lakh annually. Therefore, the income tax deduction is only a meagre amount. 9. Taking Rs.1,10,000/- as his monthly net income, Rs.15,000/- per month is awarded as maintenance to the petitioner which will be payable from the date of filing of the maintenance alteration case. With this modification, this Cr. Revision Petition stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) Pawan/ -