RAM LAL Vs. KAMLESH KUMARI AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application, under Sec. 482, Criminal Procedure Code . moved by one Ram Lal, praying to quash the orders, dated 27-2-1981 and 27-5-1981, passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate and the Sessions Judge, Dehradun, respectively.

(2.) The relevant facts of the case are that Smt. Kamlesh Kumari, opposite party No 1, applied for maintenance, under Sec. 125, Cr P.C., against the applicant in the court of the Special Judicial Magistrate, Dehradum. The Magistrate decided her application for maintenance ex-parte on 23-5-1980 and allowed her application for maintenance and passed an order that the applicant shall pay Rs. 300 per month by way of maintenance to her. He also ordered that the applicant shall pay further Rs. 200 per month in case the minor daughters of Smt. Kamlesh Kumari come to live with her for the maintenance of the said children. The opposite-party No. 1 applied for recovery of money and the Magistrate issued recovery warrants on 13-1-1981. On 27-2-1981, the applicant moved an application before the Magistrate, praying to set aside the ex parte order. On the same day, he moved another application, praying for stay of the recovery warrants. Both the orders, staying the recovery and then vacating the stay order, were passed by the Magistrate on the same day. Aggrieved by this order, dated 27-2-1981, passed by the Magistrate, the applicant went In revision before the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge, dismissed the revision on 27-5-1981 Aggrieved by the order of the Sessions Judge, dated 27-5-1981, dismissing the revision of the applicant against the order of the Magistrate, dated 27-2-1981, by which the Magistrate vacated his order of stay of recovery of maintenance allowance from him, the applicant has moved the present application under Sec. 482, Crimial P.C.

(3.) The main contention of the applicant is that his application for setting aside the ex parte order is still pending before the Magistrate and that the Magistrate has passed order on this application. Therefore, the applicant wants that the recovery of money as maintenance allowance from him he stayed till his application to set aside the ex parte order is decided by the Magistrate and, therefore, he has prayed that the order of the Magistrate, dated 27-2-1981 and that of the Sessions Judge, dated 27-5-1991, he quashed.