Guddu SharmaversusThe State of Bihar

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                       CRIMINAL REVISION No.848 of 2025
       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - MOHANIA
                                    District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
     ======================================================
     Guddu Sharma Son of Late Daddan Sharma, Resident of Village- Umapur,
     PO- Umapur, PS -Bhagwanpur, Distirct -Kaimur (Bhabhua).
                                                             ... ... Petitioner
                                    Versus

1.   The State of Bihar
2.   Anshu Sharma wife of Guddu Sharma Resident Of Village- kallan, Po-
     Thakura, Ps- Ramgarh, Dist- Kaimur (Bhabua)
3.   Vimla kuer Wife of Late Daddan Sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur Ps
     -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
4.   Vikashh Sharma Son of Late Daddan Sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur
     Ps -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
5.   Rani Sharma Wife of vikash sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur Ps
     -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
6.   Ashok Sharma son of Late Ramjee Sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur Ps
     -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
7.   Babban Sharma son of Late Ranjee Sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur Ps
     -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
8.   Bablu Sharma son of Ashok sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur Ps
     -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
9.    Aditya Sharma son of Late Rajvvansh Sharma Resident Of Village- Umapur
      Ps -Bhagwanpur Distirct -Kaimur Bhabhua
                                                           ... ... Respondents
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     For the Petitioner/s   :      Mr. Abhash, Advocate
     For the Respondent/s   :      Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
                           ORAL JUDGMENT
      Date : 06-07-2026

                      Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                      2. The present criminal revision petition has been

      filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 16.06.2025

      passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Kaimur at

      Bhabhua in Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2024, whereby and
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.848 of 2025 dt.06-07-2026
                                            2/4




         whereunder the learned Appellate Court dismissed the criminal

         appeal and upheld the order dated 05.04.2024 passed by learned

         Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sub-Divisional Court, Mohania,

         Kaimur in Complaint Case No. 465 of 2023. The learned

         Judicial Magistrate 1st Class allowed an amount of Rs. 1,500/- as

         monthly interim maintenance to the opposite party no. 2 who is

         the wife of the petitioner.

                         3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

         petitioner vehemently contends that the order has been passed

         without any regard to the income of the petitioner. Neither the

         learned Judicial Magistrate nor the learned Appellate Court took

         into consideration the fact that there was no material on record

         showing income of the petitioner. The petitioner has been

         keeping his children with himself and taking care of their

         maintenance and education. But this fact was not considered by

         the learned Appellate Court or the learned trial Court. Learned

         counsel also submits that the opposite party no. 2 is having a

         regular income from teaching.

                         4. I have perused the record.

                         5. From perusal of record I find that the learned

         Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, passed an order for grant of

         monthly interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- to the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.848 of 2025 dt.06-07-2026
                                            3/4




         opposite party no. 2 by directing the petitioner. Now, Section 23

         of The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005

         provides for power of the Court to grant interim and ex parte

         orders. The provision reads as under:

                                “(1) In any proceeding before him under
                         this Act, the Magistrate may pass such interim
                         order as he deems just and proper.
                                (2) If the Magistrate is satisfied that an
                         application prima facie discloses that the
                         respondent is committing, or has committed an act
                         of domestic violence or that there is a likelihood
                         that the respondent may commit an act of domestic
                         violence, he may grant an ex parte order on the
                         basis of the affidavit in such form, as may be
                         prescribed, of the aggrieved person under section
                         18, section 19, section 20, section 21 or, as the case
                         may be, section 22 against the respondent.”

                         6. From the bare perusal of the provision it is clear

         that on satisfaction of the Magistrate that the application filed by

         the aggrieved person prima facie discloses an act of domestic

         violence by the respondents or there is even a likelihood of the

         same, the learned Magistrate can pass an ex parte order on the

         basis of affidavit in such case. The same provision also provides

         for passing of any such interim orders as may deem fit and

         proper by the learned Magistrate in a proceeding before him.

         These interim orders could be passed by the learned Judicial

         Magistrate and these interim orders could also be in the nature

         of ex parte order. The reading of the provision makes it clear
             Patna High Court CR. REV. No.848 of 2025 dt.06-07-2026
                                                         4/4




                      that no evidence is required to be considered by the learned

                      Magistrate before passing the order for interim maintenance. In

                      the same vein, there is no requirement of appearance of the

                      respondent or adducing evidence by the respondent for passing

                      of an interim order.


                                      7. Therefore, considering the transient nature of the

                      order of the interim maintenance which has been assailed by the

                      petitioner in the Appellate Court and thereafter by way of

                      revision in this Court, I find no legal infirmity in the order of the

                      learned Appellate Court as well as the Court of learned Judicial

                      Magistrate 1st Class.

                                      8. Accordingly, finding no merit in the present

                      revision petition the same is dismissed.



                                                               (Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Shahnawaz/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          07.07.2026
Transmission Date       07.07.2026