JUDGMENT 1. - This Revision Petition under section 397 read with section 401 CrPC is directed against the order dated 27th June 2011 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh in Cr. Revision No.189/2010, whereby revision petition of petitioner-husband was partly allowed, thereby modifying amount of interim maintenance to Rs. 1000/- per month from Rs. 2000/- per month to the present petitioner-wife, as ordered by the trial court by its order dated 01st July 2010. 2. Briefly stating facts of the case are that petitioner-wife preferred an application under section 125 CrPC before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapasan (Chittorgarh), inter alia, averring that the respondent married her on 19.4.2000 in village Kotla with Hindu rites & customs. After some time of the marriage the petitioner-husband and the in-laws started giving her maltreatment, demanding more dowry. Some amount was paid by her father but still their demand exceeded, which could not be fulfilled by her father. They respondent-husband started beating her and ultimately expelled her from the matrimonial home. With these averments, the present non-petitioner-wife moved an application under section 125 CrPC praying for maintenance allowance from petitioner-husband. 3. During pendency of the application under section 125 CrPC, an application for grant of interim maintenance was filed. The respondent-husband mainly contended that he has moved an application for restitution of the conjugal rights and the wife is living separately at her own. After considering the rival submissions, learned trial judge by an elaborate order accepted the application and ordered the respondent-husband for payment of Rs. 2000/- per month towards interim maintenance till appropriate order is passed on the application under section 125 CrPC. 4. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent-husband moved a Revision Petition before learned Sessions Judge, whereupon learned Sessions Judge partly accepted his petition and reduced the amount of interim maintenance from Rs. 2000/- per month to Rs. 1000/- per month. Present Revision Petition has been preferred by the petitioner-wife against reducing of the amount of interim maintenance by the learned Sessions Judge vide impugned order dated 27th June 2011. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the order impugned while reiterating the contentions raised before the court below and submitted that the respondent-husband wrongly alleged but failed to show that the petitioner-wife has any other source of income. In the Revision before the court below, learned Sessions Judge wrongly reduced the reasonable amount of interim maintenance from Rs. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the order impugned while reiterating the contentions raised before the court below and submitted that the respondent-husband wrongly alleged but failed to show that the petitioner-wife has any other source of income. In the Revision before the court below, learned Sessions Judge wrongly reduced the reasonable amount of interim maintenance from Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 1000/-. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent-husband contended that he is educated unemployed person and participating in competitive examinations and has no stable income source but due to false cases lodged by the petitioner-wife, he is in deep mental agony, which is harmful for his bright career. It was asserted by the learned revisional court below that the petitioner-wife is getting maintenance of Rs. 2000/- as per order of the District Judge, Rajsamand. The petitioner-wife never fulfilled her duty as wife with the petitioner, so she is not entitled to get maintenance and the petition should be rejected. 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders passed by the court below. The provision of section 125 CrPC is enacted for social justice, specially to protect women and children and falls within the constitutional sweep of Article 15(3) of the Constitution, which is enforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India. The provision gives effect to the natural and fundamental duty of a man to maintain his wife and children so long they are unable to maintain themselves. In fixing quantum of maintenance, standard of living consistent with the status of the family must be taken into consideration. Neither unemployment nor poverty is an answer to a petition under section 125 CrPC because it ensures socio-economic rights of the women and protect them from vagrancy. The husband can not plead that he is unable to maintain his wife and children. 8. The petitioner-wife filed an application under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act before learned District Judge, Rajsamand, seeking maintenance from her husband respondent in a proceeding pending under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the learned District Judge vide order dated 17th January 2011 in Misc. Civil Case No.249/2010 allowed the application and ordered the husband respondent to pay Rs. 2000/- per month to the petitioner wife and Rs. 100/- for each hearing date. Civil Case No.249/2010 allowed the application and ordered the husband respondent to pay Rs. 2000/- per month to the petitioner wife and Rs. 100/- for each hearing date. It was also ordered that if the wife is getting any amount in other cases then the same shall be adjusted in this amount. 9. So, in the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of considered opinion that the learned Sessions Judge wrongly and without any ground reduced the amount of interim maintenance from Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 1000/-. The order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapasan for granting interim maintenance at Rs. 2000/- per month is just and proper and does not deserve any interference by the Sessions Judge and by this Court also. 10. Consequently, the Revision Petition filed by the wife petitioner is allowed. The impugned order dated 27th June 2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chittorgarh in Cr. Case No.189/2010 is quashed and set aside and the order dated 01st July 2010 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapasan in Cr. Misc. Petition No.264/2009 is maintained. 11. The Stay Petition also accordingly stands disposed of.Revision allowed. *******