High CourtsDivision Bench

Hiralal Valavdas vs Bai Amba

Bombay High Court · Decided on 26 March 1926 · Citation: AIR 1926 Bom 419 : 96 Ind. Cas. 396

HON’BLE JUDGES
Norman Macleod, C.J · Lallubhai, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (CrPC) — Section 488
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

2 paragraphs · 125 words
1.

This is an application in revision against the order of a Magistrate increasing the maintenance allowance of the applicant Bai Amba, u/s 488 of the Cr.P.C. from Rs. 8-4-0 to Rs. 18 per mensem, the order to take effect retrospectively from the date of the application.

2.

It has been argued that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to make the order. u/s 488 the Magistrate has power to make the maintenance payable from the date of the application. We cannot see why he should not have the same power to direct, if he thinks fit, when an application is made to vary the order as regards the maintenance payable, that maintenance at the increased rate should be paid from the date of the application.