JUDGMENT
S.S. Rathor, J.
1. Sanotsh Kumari, respondent filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. along with a separate application for grant of interim maintenance. The petitioner on being served with the petition, appeared before the trial Magistrate and contested the proceedings and also the prayer for grant of interim maintenance. The wife (Smt. Santosh Kumari, respondent) alleged in the application that her husband was earning Rs. 5,000/- per month from various sources as mentioned in the application. However, the husband (petitioner before this Court) contested the said application and pleaded, that he had no income of his own and that be was only working as a labourer at the shop of his father who is running a Juice shop in the Bus Stand Bhatinda under the name and style ”Pahwa Juice Corner”. The Trial Court, in view of the respective averments of the parties granted a sum of Rs. 500/- to the wife and her minor daughter out of which the minor daughter was granted Rs. 200/- per month.
2. Feeling aggrieved, the husband filed a revision petition before the Sessions Judge, Sirsa which was finally dismissed by Shri N.S. Ahlwat vide order dated 2-4-1990. Thereafter the husband filed a petition before this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashment of the orders of the Courts below. While issuing notice to the respondents on 5-11-1990 brother S.S. Grewal, J. passed the following order :–
“Notice to the respondents through Santosh Kumari respondent No. 1 for 18-12-1990.
Meanwhile proceedings concerning recovery of interim maintenance are directed to be stayed subject to the condition that the petitioner deposits one half of the amount already due within a fortnight from today in the Trial Court for payment to the present respondents. In case the petitioner fails “to do so the stay granted by this Court shall be deemed to have been vacated.”
However, the petitioner did not deposit half of the arrears of interim maintenance and this Court vide order dated 15-7-1991 granted an opportunity to do the needful uptil 26-7-1991. On 16-1-1992, as the matter regarding vacation of stay was pending before this Court, the Counsel for the parties made an agreed statement that the parties be directed to appear before the Court so that possibility of settlement of litigation could be explored. The petitioner was further directed to produce the receipt of payment of interim maintenance till date in terms of the order of this Court dated 15-7-1991. However, Mr. V.K. Kataria Counsel for the petitioner has not produced the receipt but has stated that the aforesaid arrears have been deposited due till July, 1991 and the same have been paid over to the respondents. In the background of these facts, this petition is being disposed of finally.
3. The impugned orders have been passed by way of interim maintenance during the pendency of the main petition. The Trial Court passed the order at preliminary stage of proceedings on the basis of averments made by the respective parties. Though the power to grant such interim maintenance is very much within the inherent powers of the Trial Court and findings recorded cannot be lightly interfered by this Court while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., yet in the facts and circumstances of this case, it would be just and equitable to direct that the petitioner shall deposit 3/4th of the arrears of interim maintenance granted by the Trial Court by February 29, 1992 after adjusting the amount already deposited under the orders of this Court. If this amount due uptil end of February, 1992 is not deposited on or before the date indicated above, this order would not be operative and the petitioner shall be under an obligation to pay interim maintenance amount in terms of the orders of the Trial 6ourt i.e. @ Rs. 500/- per month. If the arrears are deposited as directed above, the interim maintenance to Smt. Santosh Kumari would stand reduced to Rs. 175/- per month only and that granted to the minor daughter would remain the same i.e. Rs. 200/- per month. Further, it is made clear that this order is being passed to meet the ends of justice between the parties keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. The petitioners as stated by his Counsel, has already deposited lumpsum amount clearing the arrears of interim maintenance upto 22-7-1991. Now again he is being directed to deposit the balance of the arrears in lumpsum due upto end of February, 1992 by 29th of February, 1992. It is apparent that sufficient amount in hand would go to the wife for her and her minor daughter’s interim maintenance.
4. Mr. Kataria has further agreed to make the payment in future for every month on Ist day of the following month.
5. In views of the observations made above, this petition stands disposed of in the terms indicated above. It is desired that the matter should be given priority and the Trial Court should conclude the proceedings preferably within six months from the date of receipt of the records from this Court. Parties are directed through their Counsel to appear before the Trial Court on 24-2-1992.