USMAN Vs. BADARUNISA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Can the petitioner be granted a further opportunity to adduce fresh evidence to substantiate his contentions by remand This is the vital question that falls for consideration.

(2.) This revision petition is directed against an order passed under S.125 CrPC directing the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,500/-, Rs. 1,000/- and Rs. 750/- per mensem respectively to his wife and two minor children. Marriage and subsistence of the marriage are admitted. The paternity of the second claimant is also admitted. That the third claimant was born during the subsistence of the marriage is against conceded. But there is a dispute raised about the paternity of the third claimant/ second child.

(3.) The petitioner was admittedly employed abroad. The second child was born when the petitioner was employed abroad. The petitioner appears to entertain a doubt / suspicion / apprehension that the second child is not born to him. He further alleges that the 1st claimant wife is having adulterous intimacy with her sister's husband. The petitioner makes himself bold to allege that the third claimant / child is born in that adulterous relationship between the 1st claimant and her brother in law. He further contends that the wife is not unable to maintain herself. It is also his contention that he does not have the means to pay the amounts claimed by the claimants. Interestingly he crowns his other contentions with the contention that he is willing to maintain his wife on condition that she lives with him.