7-WP-210-2026 (CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 210 OF 2026 Sarika Pankaj Kadam and anr. ...Petitioner/s Versus Pankaj Balasaheb Kadam and anr. ...Respondent/s _________________________________________________________________ Mr. Dnyaneshwar Kale i/b. Ms. Nandini Chittal, Advocate for Petitioners. Mr. Prathamesh Bhargude, Advocate for Respondent No.2. Ms. Ranjana D. Humane, APP for Respondent-State. _________________________________________________________________ CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J. DATE : 11th SEPTEMBER, 2026. P.C. : 1. The challenge in this petition is to the impugned order dated 16th October, 2025 passed below Exhibit 43 in Petition A.No.860 of 2022 by learned Judge, Family Court No.6, Pune, whereby the learned Judge granted maintenance of only 8,000/- per month to petitioner No.2(minor ₹ daughter) of petitioner No.1 and did not award any maintenance to petitioner No.1. 2. It is contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is residing with her 11-year-old daughter and had filed an application for maintenance. Respondent No.1 works in a software company and earns a salary of more than 2,00,000/- per month. The ₹ learned Judge did not consider this fact and awarded only 8,000/- per ₹ SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Digitally signed by SHUBHADA SHANKAR KADAM Date: 2026.09.12 15:40:28 +0530 7-WP-210-2026 (CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam month as maintenance to the daughter without awarding any maintenance to petitioner No.1. Petitioner No.1 has to bear the educational expenses of her daughter, hence, requested to allow the petition. 3. It is contention of learned counsel for respondents that the petitioner works as Deputy Manager in ICICI Bank and earns 61,000/- ₹ per month. She has sufficient sources of income including rental income of 15,000/- per month from a house in her name and investments in mutual ₹ funds. Respondent No.1 has his own financial liabilities. Learned Judge has passed a well-reasoned order and no interference is required in it, and requested to dismiss the petition. 4. I have heard both learned counsel, perused the impugned judgment and order. Respondent No.1 works in an IT company and earns a salary of 2,06,983/- per month. Though the petitioner is also working, ₹ her salary is around 61,000/- per month. She is taking care of her ₹ 11-year-old daughter and is required to bear the educational expenses, medical expenses, and other expenses of the daughter. The learned Judge granted 8,000/- per month as maintenance to the daughter. In my view, ₹ the said amount is on the lower side. Considering the present rate of inflation and educational expenses, the amount of 8,000/- per month is ₹ meager. In view of the above, I pass following order: 7-WP-210-2026 (CR).doc Shubhada S Kadam O R D E R 1. The petition is allowed. 2. The impugned order dated 16th October, 2025 passed below Exhibit 43 in Petition A.No.860 of 2022 by learned Judge, Family Court No.6, Pune, is quashed and set-aside. 3. Respondent No.1 shall pay 25,000/- per month as maintenance ₹ to petitioner No. 2- the minor daughter, from the date of passing of the order by the Family Court i.e. with effect from 16th October 2025. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.)