Dismissed¶29

Z.Sheinsha Sadham Hussain v. a.R.Rubina

Madras HC16 Jul 2026CRL RC/1459/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, CRL RC No. 1459 of 2026, Shamim Ahmed J., 16-07-2026; interim maintenance Rs.10,000/- p.m. upheld; revision under Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS against Family Court order in M.C.No.543 of 2022 (Section 125 Cr.P.C.); Section 144 BNSS destitute wife vagrancy; quantum not excessive; no interference; revision dismissed; connected miscellaneous petition closed.

What did the court decide?

None to the Revision Petitioner; the interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- p.m. in favour of the Respondent stands undisturbed and the connected Miscellaneous Petition (CRL MP No. 12508 of 2026) is closed. ¶29

Z.Sheinsha Sadham Hussain Vs a.R.Rubina — Maintenance and Alimony | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned order of the Trial Court granting interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- p.m. to the Respondent suffers from any illegality, impropriety or incorrectness warranting interference in this Criminal Revision Case.

¶20

Court's answer

The interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- fixed by the Court below cannot be considered excessive, disproportionate or unreasonable in the present days of rising prices and high cost of living; the monetary relief granted is adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved person is accustomed.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

Section 144 of BNSS is enacted to stop the vagrancy of a destitute wife and to provide succour to those entitled to maintenance, which cannot be denied.

¶27

Key takeaways

Learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner was unable to point out any illegality, impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned orders granting such quantum of maintenance warranting interference by this Court.ratio¶27
The impugned order does not require any interference by this Court; the Criminal Revision Case lacks merits and is liable to be dismissed.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Maintenance — Interim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. — Revision under Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS against order dated 21.11.2024 of III Additional Family Court, Chennai in M.C.No.543 of 2022 awarding Rs.10,000/- p.m. to the wife — Husband contended wife refused to live with him without cause and court below ignored his liabilities, financial status and her income — Held: quantum of Rs.10,000/- p.m. not excessive, disproportionate or unreasonable in present days of rising prices and high cost of living; relief adequate, fair, reasonable and consistent with the standard of living to which the aggrieved person is accustomed; Section 144 of BNSS enacted to stop vagrancy of a destitute wife and provide succour to those entitled to maintenance; no illegality, impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned order demonstrated — Criminal Revision Case dismissed as devoid of merits; connected CRL MP No. 12508 of 2026 closed.

¶1

CRL RC No. 1459 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 16-07-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SHAMIM AHMED

¶6

CRL RC No. 1459 of 2026 AND CRL MP NO. 12508 OF 2026

¶7

Z.Sheinsha Sadham Hussain

..Petitioner(s)

A.R.Rubina

..Respondent(s)

PRAYER – This Criminal Revision Case is filed under Section 438 r/w 442 BNSS, to call for the records and set aside the order dated 21.11.2024 made in MC.No.543 of 2022 on the file of the III Additional Family Court at Chennai.

¶13

For Petitioner(s): Mr.M.G.Abdul Jaleel

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This Criminal Revision Case is filed to set aside the judgment passed by the III Additional Family Court at Chennai in M.C.No. 543 of 2022 dated 21.11.2024.

¶16

2.The facts of the case are that the Revision Petitioner and the Respondent got married on 14.03.2021. The Respondent had filed M.C.No.543 of 2022, seeking interim maintenance before the Trial Court. In the said M.C.No.543 of 2022 filed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., by the impunged order

¶17

Page1 of 4

¶18

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶19

CRL RC No. 1459 of 2026

¶20

of the Trial Court, a sum of Rs.10,000/- p.m. was ordered to be paid to the Respondent as an interim maintenance. Hence, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Revision Petitioner, challenging the same.

¶21

3.The learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has submitted that the court below failed to appreciate the fact that the Respondent voluntarily refused to live with him, without any reasonable cause and that without considering the liabilities and the financial status of the Revision Petitioner and also the source of income available to the Respondent, the Trial Court had passed the impugned order, granting interim maintenance to the tune of Rs.10,000/- p.m. to the Respondent and that without proper application of mind, the impugned order had been passed in a mechanical manner and hence, this Criminal Revision Case is liable to be allowed, as prayed for.

¶22

4.This Court considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the entire materials placed on record.

¶23

5.The facts that the Revision Petitioner is the husband of the Respondent is not been denied. The amount fixed towards interim maintenance by the Court Below is Rs.10,000/- for the Respondent, which, in the present days of rising prices and high cost of living, cannot be considered as excessive or disproportionate or unreasonable. The said monetary relief granted to the

¶24

Page2 of 4

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

CRL RC No. 1459 of 2026

¶27

Respondent, by the courts below is adequate, fair and reasonable and consistent with the standard of living, to which the aggrieved person is accustomed. The provisions of Section 144 of BNSS are enacted to stop the vagrancy of a destitute wife and provide some succour to them, who are entitled to get the maintenance, which cannot be denied. Further, the learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner has not been able to point out any illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned orders, granting such quantum of maintenance, warranting interference by this Court.

¶28

6.In such circumstances, to meet the ends of justice, the impugned order does not require any interference by this Court, as this court does not find any illegality or impropriety or incorrectness in the impugned order and this Criminal Revision Case lacks merits and hence, it is liable to be dismissed.

¶29

7.In the result, the Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed, as devoid of merits. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶30

16-07-2026

¶31

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶32

GSA

¶33

__________ Page3 of 4

¶34

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis