RAQEEMUDDIN AHMAD Vs. SMT. SHAHIN ISHRAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed against an order dated 30.6.87 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge. Lucknow allowing the revision filed by the opposite parties and thereby setting aside the judgment and order passed by Sri. R.K Singh, Addl. Munsif-Magistrate Lucknow in case No. 2039 of 84 refusing to grant maintenance under Sec. 125 Criminal Procedure Code The learned Addl. Sessions Judge while allowing the revision has awarded Rs. 150.00 per month to opposite party No. 1, the wife and Rs. 100.00 per month to opposite party No. 2, the son of the present revisionist.

(2.) The opposite parties to this revision (hereinafter called the applicants) had moved an application under Sec. 125 Criminal Procedure Code against the present revisionist (hereafter called the respondent) for maintenance. Applicant No. 1 is the wife and applicant No. 2 is the son of the respondent. Applicant No. 1 was married to the respondent in June 1971 at Lucknow and after marriage she went to her in-law's house and remained therewith her husband. She was, however, nor treated properly by her husband. In Nov., 1972 when she was in family way she was beaten by the respondent and the applicant No. 1 sent information to her father, who came to her at her in-law's house in Sawai Modhopur, Rajasthan and had taken the applicant with him to Lucknow, where she gave birth to applicant No. 2 on 17.2.1973. The respondent did not take case of the applicants and did not pay anything for their maintenance till they were at Lucknow till the father of applicant No. 1. In Aug., 1974 the respondent came to Lucknow and assured the father of applicant No. 1 that he would keep both the applicants comfortably and on that assurance the applicants went to Sawai Modhopur, Rajasthan with the respondent. They remained there for about a month and during that period respondent levelled a false charge of theft against applicant No. 1 and called father of applicant No. 1 and sent her to her parents house and since then the respondent has neglected and did not take any care of the applicants. Both the applicants are living at the mercy of the father of applicant No. 1. The applicants have no source of livelihood. Applicant No. 2 needs proper care and education.

(3.) The respondent, on the other hand, is in Government service and is getting Rs. 700.00 per month besides Rs. 280.00 from tuition. On the allegations, an application was moved by the applicants on 5.10.1983. Since the applicant No. 2 is minor, the application was moved on his behalf through his mother as guardian, the applicant No. 1. The respondent filed written statement and did admit that applicant No.1 was married to him. He also admitted that applicant No. 2 was born out of wedlock. It was further alleged that in July, 1974 he had brought the applicants to his house at Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan, but in Sept. 1974 the father of applicant No. 1 had taken both the applicants with him during the period of Ramazan and that applicant No. 1 had taken all the ornaments etc. Thereafter the respondent sent letters requesting applicant No. 1 to come back, but she did not respond. In 1977 the respondent went to take his wife but she refused to come. He, therefore, gave a notice and thereafter filed a suit in the court of Munsif Madhopur Rajasthan against applicant No. 1 for restitution of conjugal rights. Which was decreed on 20.5.82. Earlier also the applicant had moved an application under Sec. 125 Criminal Procedure Code which was dismissed. The applicants had no sufficient ground to leave the company of the respondent.