SHIV KUMAR YADAV Vs. SANTOSHII YADAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has preferred this revision under Sec. 397 read with Sec. 401 of the Cr.P.C. 1973, being aggrieved by the order dated 18- 10-2003 passed by the 3rd Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.C.), Bemetara whereby he reversed the order dtd. 8/1/99 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bemetara, in Misc. Criminal Case No.20/1997 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate rejected the application of respondent Smt. Santoshi Bai filed under Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance.

(2.) Brief facts leading to filing of this revision petition are that the marriage of the petitioner and respondent ( hereinafter Shiv Kumar Yadav- husband will be referred as petitioner and wife Santoshi Bail will be referred as respondent) was solemnized one and half year before the filing of the application under Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. by respondent on 6/9/1996. After two months of the marriage Gauna ceremony took place and the petitioner took the respondent to his residence at village Kanhera. Both the parties lived together for 4 to 5 months and as per the allegations in the application the petitioner herein started harassing, ill-treating and subjected to cruelty to respondent for bringing dowry. Thereafter, on Teja festival the respondent was taken by her relatives to Bemetara. After celebration of Teja festival the maternal grandmother of respondent namely, Jhaman Bai and grandfather namely, Siyaram Yadav along with respondent came to her in-laws house at Kanhera for leaving the respondent at her in-laws' house. However, the petitioner started abusing them saying that he would not keep the respondent at his residence, but her grandmother and grandfather left her at her in-laws' house.

(3.) As per the allegations of respondent, five months prior to filing of the application under Sec. 125 of the Cr.P.C. the petitioner took the respondent along with him and left her at the Bus stand of Bemetara and disappeared. After waiting 3 to 4 hours she had left for her maternal grandmother's house. The parents of respondent are labourers and they are not able to maintain the respondent and the respondent is unable to maintain herself, whereas the petitioner's annual income from agricultural sources was said to be Rs.20,000.00 and the applicant is earning round about Rs.900.00 per month by doing the labour job.