Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Varun Jaiswal vs State Of Rajasthan on 9 February, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 10108/2025
Varun Jaiswal S/o Radheshyam Jaiswal, Aged About 29 Years,
214/14/2 4Th, Hanuman Temple Road, Ambedhakar Bhawan Ke
Samne, Gokarnaharali, Bangalore. Karnatka
----Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
2. Vishakha Jaiswal W/o Varun Jaiswal, Aged About 27
Years, Padru Ki Bass, Siwana, Teh. Siwana, Badmer
3. Mayank Jaiswal S/o Varun Jaiswal, Aged About 4 Years,
Padru Ki Bass, Siwana, Teh. Siwana, Badmer Minor
Through Mother Smt. Vishakha
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Naval Kishor Soni
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ramesh Dewasi, PP
Ms. Vishakha Jaiswal (present in
person)
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU
Order 09/02/2026 The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved against the order dated 04.11.2025 passed by the learned Family Court, Balotra (for short 'the trial Court'), wherein the petitioner had preferred an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C in the proceedings pending before the Family Court, for adjustment of the amount of maintenance of Rs. 12,000/-. This order was passed by the Court on 03.05.2023 at Siwana, in the proceedings under the Protection of women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short the Act of 2005). The learned Family Court dismissed (Uploaded on 16/02/2026 at 07:08:14 PM) (Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:31:42 PM) (2 of 4) [CRLMP-10108/2025] the application seeking adjustment of the said maintenance amount against the interim maintenance awarded vide order dated 16.03.2024, stating that the said issue would be decided at the time of final adjudication of the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. itself.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Family Court under Sections 125 (3) Cr.P.C. had fixed an initial maintenance amount of Rs.30,000/- vide order dated 16.03.2024 however, this Court vide order dated 10.12.2024 passed in S.B.CRLMP No.3942/2024 had reduced the aforesaid amount to Rs.20,000/-.
It is submitted that the said issue of adjustment was not considered by the Hon'ble High Court as only the amount was reduced. Further, in S.B CRLMP No.5846/2025 this Hon'ble Court had given the liberty to the petitioner to file an appropriate application before the Family Court, Balotra for adjustment of the amount. Thereafter, the petitioner has preferred an application for adjustment under Section 125 Cr.P.C., before the Family Court, however, the Court did not interfere in the same stating that while passing the order of maintenance dated 16.03.2024, the Court was aware of the fact of pendency of Domestic Violence proceedings and the application was dismissed vide order dated 04.11.2025.
It is further submitted that the trial court while passing the order dated 16.03.2024, did not pass any specific order with regard to the adjustment of maintenance amount, and mere knowledge of the maintenance order under the Domestic Violence Act was not sufficient and a specific order should have been (Uploaded on 16/02/2026 at 07:08:14 PM) (Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:31:42 PM) (3 of 4) [CRLMP-10108/2025] passed. There was no application of mind by the learned trial court in that respect.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed by the learned Family Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 without application of mind and without considering the issue.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in Rajnesh Vs. Neha and Anr. reported in 2020 INSC 631.
The respondent No.2, present in person, disputes the facts and argued that the application filed by the petitioner has rightly been rejected by the trial court as the proceedings of the Domestic Violence Act were brought to the knowledge of the trial court and, therefore, there is no scope for interference in the matter.
This Court has considered the matter and has gone through the orders dated 04.11.2025 and 16.03.2024.
While passing the order of maintenance, the trial court has not passed any specific order regarding adjustment of maintenance amount in its order dated 16.03.2024. Merely having knowledge of pendency of proceedings is of no consequence, and when two proceedings of maintenance were pending, the trial court should have passed a clear and speaking order in this regard.
However, in the present case, the submission of evidence of the parities is near completion and the case is fixed for defence evidence now. The Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 has dismissed the application on the ground that the issue would be (Uploaded on 16/02/2026 at 07:08:14 PM) (Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:31:42 PM) (4 of 4) [CRLMP-10108/2025] considered at the time of final adjudication of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
In view of the fact that since the evidence is near completion, without commenting on the merits of the case, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the order dated 04.11.2025, and expects the Family Court to specifically decide the issue of adjustment of amount of maintenance fixed by the Court of Siwana under the Act of 2005, at the time of final adjudication of the case while considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Rajnesh Vs Neha (supra). There will be no bar for passing the order for adjusting the amount since the passing of the interim order dated 16.03.2024.
It is further clarified that no order regarding adjustment of maintenance was at all passed by the Family Court while deciding the interim maintenance application vide order 16.03.2024. Hence, the order dated 16.03.2024 shall not influence the Family Court.
This Court further directs the trial court to dispose of the main application expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months.
Accordingly, with these observations the present criminal misc. petition is disposed of.
All the pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
(BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J 35-mayank/-
(Uploaded on 16/02/2026 at 07:08:14 PM) (Downloaded on 16/02/2026 at 08:31:42 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)