Aditya vs. Smt. Rishika
Held
The Court held that the scope of revision against an interim maintenance order is limited, as prima facie findings are subject to proof through evidence at the final stage. The decree of divorce had not attained finality as it was under challenge. The grounds under Section 125(4) and (5) of the Cr.PC and the wife's income are matters to be decided at the final stage. Citing *Rajesh Vs. Neha, (2021) 2 SCC 324*, the Court noted that maintenance should be awarded from the date of the application. No illegality was found in the impugned order that warranted interference in either revision. Consequently, both revisions filed by the husband and wife were dismissed in limine.
Facts
Two criminal revisions were filed before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore concerning an interim maintenance order. Smt. Rishika (wife) was awarded Rs. 20,000/- per month as interim maintenance from the date of application (06.04.2022) by the Additional Judge, Family Court, Indore, vide an order dated 20.01.2025. Aditya (husband), an Inspector in the GST Department with a net salary of Rs. 83,190/- in June 2024, had filed for divorce in June 2020, which was granted on 05.09.2023 on grounds of cruelty and desertion. Aditya filed Criminal Revision No. 778 of 2025 challenging the interim maintenance, arguing that an FIR against him was quashed and the divorce decree should preclude maintenance under Section 125(4) and (5) of the Cr.PC. Rishika filed Criminal Revision No. 1210 of 2025 seeking an enhanced maintenance of at least Rs. 50,000/- per month.
Key Issues
1. Whether the interim maintenance awarded by the Family Court is legally sustainable given that an FIR against the husband was quashed and a decree of divorce has been granted in his favour, particularly in light of Section 125(4) and (5) of the Cr.PC? (Question of law) 2. Whether the interim maintenance awarded is inadequate and ought to be enhanced to at least one-third of the husband's salary, considering his income?
Sections Cited
Section 125, Section 125(4), Section 125(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER As the controversy involved in both these revisions is identical, therefore, they are being disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, the facts narrated in Cr. Revision No. 1210/2025 are taken into consideration.
Vide order dated 20.01.2025 in MJCR No. 475/2022 by Additional Judge to the Court of Principal Judge Family Court, Indore, Rs. 20,000/- per month interim maintenance payable from the date of application i.e 06.04.2022 has been awarded in favour of the wife (Rishika) . 1 CRR-778-2025 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:14453 Undisputed facts as transpires from the record is that the marriage of petitioner – Rishika with respondent – Adity
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.