SATWANT SINGH Vs. SMT. JASWANT KAUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Kumaun recommending that an order dated 4th February, 1955 passed by a learned Magistrate in proceedings under Section 488, Code of Criminal Procedure be set aside and Smt. Jaswant Kaur be directed to seek her remedy n proper court.

(2.) AN application wan filed by Smt. Jaswant Kaur against her husband Satwant Singh under Section 488, Code of Criminal Procedure claiming maintenance. In that application the husband was described as employed in the Navy and as residing in Bombay. No allegations were made showing how the Naini Tal court where the application was filed had jurisdiction to entertain the application. Notice of the application was served on Satwant Singh at Ludhiana in the Punjab. Satwant Singh denied the allegations made by Jaswant Kaur and he contended that he was always willing to take her back to his house and to keep and maintain her as his wife. And he further contended that he had filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against her in the Court of the Senior Sub -Judge of Delhi within whose jurisdiction he was residing. Satwant Singh further contended that the Naini Tal Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the application under Section 488, Code of Criminal Procedure The learned Magistrate held that the Naini Tal Court had jurisdiction, and further held that the wife was entitled to get Rs. 30/ - per month for her maintenance while she was living apart from him. The point of jurisdiction was in my opinion wrongly decided by the Magistrate.

(3.) FLYING or casual visits cannot, therefore, amount to residence. The meaning of the word "reside" was considered by a Bench of this Court in Rifaqatullah Khan v. Emperor, 1946 A.W.R. (H.C.) 438 : A. Cr. R. 133 and it was observed that the word meant: