ISRAIL Vs. NAFISA BEGUM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) P. K. Jain, J. List has been revised. Heard Shri Z. K. Husain holding brief of Shri R. K. Jain, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. None appears for opposite party No. 1.

(2.) OPPOSITE party No. 1 claiming to be wife of the revisionist moved an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. claiming main tenance allowance for herself and for her minor child being son of the revisionist. The trial court rejected the application holding that, wife left the house or the husband out of her own free will. Revision preferred by the wife was allowed by the revisional court and maintenance allowance of Rs. 100 per month was awarded to the wife and at the rate of Rs. 150 per month was awarded to the minor son, Shamshad. It is this order of the revisional court which is being chal lenged in this revision.

(3.) THERE cannot be dispute about the legal position-that while hearing and dispos ing 01 the criminal revision the revisional court cannot substitute its own findings of fact after disturbing the findings of fact ar rived at by the trial court. The revisional court has, therefore, committed error in substituting its own findings of fact. If the revisional court was of the view that findings of fact arrived at by the trial court were perverse, the revisional court could have remanded the case for decision afresh.