SOMAN Vs. N. P. MAIDHILI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner, who is undergoing sentence in prison, has preferred this revision petition through prison authorities. He has been sentenced under S.125(3) CrPC to undergo imprisonment consecutively for a period of 32 months as per separate orders passed in 4 petitions. The claimants had filed an application under S.125 CrPC. Maintenance was ordered initially @ Rs.350/- and Rs.250/- per mensem to the claimants - wife and child of the petitioner. Later an application for enhancement was filed and as per the order passed in MC No. 317 of 2001, maintenance was enhanced to Rs.1,000/- in all (Rs.500/- per mensem to each of the claimants). For a period of 39 months from 13/06/04 to 12/09/07, the amounts due were not paid. This obliged the claimants to seek execution of the order before the Family Court and the claimants filed 4 different applications. In those applications--

(2.) The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned orders. This Revision Petition has been preferred through prison authorities. The services of a State Brief Counsel was made available to the petitioner. The respondent has entered appearance. Arguments have been heard.

(3.) I shall ignore the technicality that one revision has been filed to challenge the orders in 4 different petitions. In the circumstances of the case, I am satisfied that the said inadequacy can be ignored.