Patna High Court
Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay UppadhayyaversusRuby Devi
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The interim maintenance was reduced to Rs.10,000 per month (Rs.6,000 to the wife and Rs.4,000 to the son).
Summary
The petitioner challenged an interim maintenance order dated 11-12-2024 that required him to pay Rs.12,000 per month to his wife and son, arguing that the Family Court had presumed his income at Rs.2 lakh per month without any material evidence. The respondent contended that the order was only interim, that the petitioner had deserted his wife, and that the amount was reasonable given living costs. The High Court noted that while the trial court had not obtained concrete proof of the petitioner’s income, it was appropriate to ensure a reasonable maintenance for the dependent wife and child. The Court, exercising its power to modify interim orders, reduced the wife’s share from Rs.8,000 to Rs.6,000 while keeping the son’s share at Rs.4,000, making the total interim maintenance Rs.10,000 per month. The revision petition was disposed of without expressing any view on the merits of the final maintenance determination.
Issues considered
- Whether the Family Court erred in fixing an interim maintenance amount of Rs.12,000 per month without concrete proof of the petitioner’s income.
- Whether the presumption of the petitioner’s income at Rs.2 lakh per month is permissible for interim maintenance.
- Whether the High Court can modify an interim maintenance order on revision.
Subjects
- interim maintenance
- family court
- revision
- presumption of income
- modification of order
- Section 125 CrPC
- maintenance case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.297 of 2025
======================================================
Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Uppadhayya Son of Late Chaman
Upadhyay, Resident of Near-4 Bihar Regiment Quarter, Namkum, Ranchi,
Police Station - Namkum in the district of Ranchi (Jharkhand)
... ... Petitioner
Versus
Ruby Devi Wife of Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Uppadhayya and
Daughter of Surendra Kumar Dubey, Resident of Village - Devkuli, P.S. -
Brahmpur in the district of Buxar
... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent : Mr. Mani Lal Mahto, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present Criminal Revision petition has been
filed against the order dated 11.12.2024 passed by learned
Principal Judge, Family Court, Buxar in Maintenance Case No. 28
of 2020, by which the petitioner has been directed to pay monthly
Interim maintenance of Rs. 12,000/- per month (Rs. 8,000/- for
opposite party no. 2/wife and Rs. 4,000/- for her son). The amount
of Interim maintenance was made payable with effect from
22.06.2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
without any material being available on record regarding income
of petitioner, the learned Family Court has fixed the Interim
maintenance amount which is excessive. Though the learned
Family Court has noted this fact that opposite party no. 2/wife has
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.297 of 2025(5) dt.03-02-2026
2/4
not furnished any document with regard to income of her husband
or any land record, still, the Family Court went on to assume
income of Rs. 2 lakh per month of the petitioner and on that basis
ordered for the payment of Rs. 8,000/- to the opposite party no.
2/wife and Rs. 4,000/- to her son. He further submits that the
opposite party no. 2/wife has filed a false affidavit regarding assets
and liabilities and the learned trial Court without ascertaining
income of the petitioner on cogent evidence fixed the maintenance
amount on the basis of presumption. Therefore, the impugned
order could not be sustained.
4. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the opposite party no. 2 submits that it is an Interim order and the
petitioner has opportunity to get it modified after trial when the
final orders are passed. Learned counsel further submits that the
petitioner deserted his wife and they have two sons and one son
stays with the petitioner, whereas the other stays with the opposite
party no. 2/wife. The order of Interim maintenance directing
payment of Rs. 12,000/- per month cannot be set to be excessive
considering the cost of living and inflation. The petitioner has
approached this Court in premature manner and has not waited for
passing of final order. Therefore, there is no infirmity in the
impugned order.
5. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.297 of 2025(5) dt.03-02-2026
3/4
rival submission of the parties. The revision has been preferred
against an Interim order and the Court’s are normally reluctant to
interfere with such order. The only ground taken by the impugned
order is that the learned trial Court did not assess the income of the
petitioner and still went on to pass order taking the income of the
petitioner to be rupees 2 lakh per month. The affidavit for assets
and liabilities are filed on behalf of the parties before the learned
trial Court. The learned trial Court has taken note of this fact that
no honest disclosure is made in the affidavit. The learned trial
Court has also noticed that the petitioner did not disclose his
income and has also not given any independent source of income.
But when the petitioner solemnized marriage with the opposite
party no. 2, he became duty-bound to maintain his wife and
children, and at this stage if the petitioner says he is not having
any independent income, such contention would be taken with a
pinch of salt. As there is no dispute over the fact that the opposite
party no. 2 and her son are dependent on the income of the
petitioner for their survival, a reasonable amount should have been
allowed towards their maintenance. However, as the matter is yet
to be finally adjudicated, I am of the considered opinion that with
slight modification in the amount of Interim maintenance, the
present revision petition can be disposed of with a direction to the
learned trial Court to dispose of the matter at the earliest, so as to
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.297 of 2025(5) dt.03-02-2026
4/4
finally decide the prayer for maintenance to the petitioner.
6. Therefore, without going into the merits of rival
contentions, the Interim maintenance amount awarded to the
opposite party no. 2 and her son is reduced from Rs. 8,000/- to Rs.
6,000/- for the opposite party no. 2/wife while keeping intact the
amount to be awarded to her son at Rs. 4,000/-. Thus, an amount
of Rs. 10,000/- will be paid by the petitioner to the opposite party
no. 2 and their son every month in terms of the impugned order
dated 11.12.2024.
7. With the aforesaid modification in the impugned
order, the present writ petition stands disposed of. It is made clear
that this Court has not expressed any opinion on respective merits
of the case of the parties and the learned Family Court would take
steps for finally disposing of the maintenance case uninfluenced
by the present order.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…