GHURAVA BAI Vs. VISHNURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant-wife being unsuccessful before the two Courts has come to this Court under Section 482, Cr. P.C. making a complaint that the two Courts did not appreciate the law properly, erred in not appreciating that the delay in making the application under Section 125, Cr. P.C. would not defeat the justice for would frustrate the right which the law confers on destitute wife.

(2.) The applicant-wife made an application before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class under Section 125, Cr. P.C. inter alia pleading that the applicant was legally wedded wife of the non-applicant, out of the wed-lock the parties were blessed with a child who was about 20 years of age on the date of maintenance application, the husband was ill-treating the wife and had also developed illicit relationship with one Sukwaro Bai. The applicant when raised objection, she was beaten and was turned out of the house. She also pleaded that she was unable to maintain herself; she had become very weak; her legs had oedema and she was under the treatment of the doctor. She also pleaded that the non-applicant/husband was well-to-do man; his yearly income from agriculture was Rs. 40,000.00; being engaged in the milk business his net earning from the said business was Rs. 5,000.00 per month and as he is giving his bullock cart on hire he is earning Rs. 100.00 per day, she claimed Rs. 500.00 towards maintenance in view of the un-amended law. The application was filed on 23.6.1993.

(3.) The husband in his reply dated 1.10.1993 stated that he was married to one Sukwaro Bai. Said Sukwaro Bai could not conceive pregnancy, therefore, he contracted the second marriage with the applicant. He, therefore, pleaded that during the life-time of the first wife, he contracted second marriage. Denying the material allegations he submitted that he never ill-treated the wife and he never turned out the wife from his house. Challenging the statement of inability of the wife to maintain herself, he submitted that the wife was a trained labour in Bidi manufacturing and she could easily earn Rs. 150.00 per month. He also submitted that the applicant was possessed of her father's one acre land and was earning about Rs. 15,000.00 per year. Denying his assets and the income he submitted that he possessed only two acres of land from which his net yearly earning was Rs. 1,000.00. He denied' the milk business and further submitted that he could give his bullock cart on hire hardly for three days in a month and could earn only Rs. 100/ - from the said vocation. In para 7, he however, submitted that he was ready and willing to maintain the applicant, but the applicant of her own was not ready to come.