(1.) BOTH these petitions arise out of the same set of facts and are being disposed of by this common order.
(2.) CRL M C No. 1859 of 2008 is directed against the order dated 28th November 2007 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ( "ASJ ") Delhi dismissing Criminal Revision No. 47 of 2007 filed by the Petitioner husband thereby affirming an order dated 29th August 2007 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate ( "MM ") Delhi directed the Petitioner to pay interim maintenance @ Rs. 2,000.00 per month to his wife Respondent No. 1 Sarika and Rs. 1,500.00 per month to his minor son Respondent No.2 Master Anurag from 8th February 2004 till the disposal of the petition on merits.
(3.) ON the first date of hearing of Crl M C No. 1859 of 2008 on 28th May 2008 this Court had directed that "the petitioner shall continue to pay interim maintenance as awarded by the trial court " during the pendency of this petition. However, despite two adjournments since then, the Petitioner has not complied with this direction. As a result despite, succeeding in her petition for interim maintenance before the learned MM and in the revision petition by the husband before learned ASJ, Respondents 1 and 2 date have till date not received any amount whatsoever from the Petitioner. Further, till date there has never been a stay of the order of the learned MM. The reason offered for non- compliance is the petitioner 's financial incapacity. This is the same ground urged before and rejected by the learned ASJ. Also, it is not as if the petitioner has made payment of a portion of the amount due to Respondents 1 and 2 and is willing to pay the balance in a reasonable time. It is a blunt refusal to make any payment whatsoever, even to the minor son. This conduct of the petitioner in making no attempt whatsoever to comply with this Court 's direction is unacceptable and should disentitle the petitioner to relief. Nevertheless learned counsel for the Petitioner has been heard at length on the merits of the case as well.