LAWS(ALL)-1988-4-37

GHULAM SABIR Vs. RAYEESA BEGUM

Decided On April 06, 1988
GHULAM SABIR Appellant
V/S
RAYEESA BEGUM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) V. P. Mathur, J. An application under Section 125 of the Cr. P. C. was moved by Smt. Raisa Begum against her husband Ghulam Sabir on 4-4-1983. It was with the allegations that they had been married about four years ago and case and ornaments worth Rs. 47,000-00 were given by way of dowry by her parents. Inspite of all this, the husband was constantly nagging her for Scooter, Fridge, and television and a pressure was being put upon her in multi farious ways to obtain the same from her parents. She was being physically and mentally tortured and cruelly treated. Ultimately, she was turned out about one and a half years ago and since then she is living with her parents. The parents are poor and she being uneducated is entitled to maintain herself and since the husband is not caring to take her back nor is sending money to her, she claims a monthly maintenance of Rs. 500 from her husband Ghulam Sabir on the ground that her husband's income is about Rs. 15,000 per month.

(2.) A written statement was filed by Ghulam Sabir on 17-6-1983. The fact of the marriage was admitted. Separate. living for the last one and a half years was also admitted but it is contended that the wife came back to her parents' house with ornaments worth Rs. 31,000 and these ornaments had been given to her by her-in-laws at the time of the marriage. Thereafter the husband had constantly been trying to get her back but she did not return and the result was that on 14-2-1983 he divorced her. She has two she-buffalos and sells the milk of the she-buffaloes and is earning about Rs. 30 per day. The husband has no independent source of income. He sits on the business premises of his father and gets about Rs. 300 per month by way of pocket expenses.

(3.) MR. R L. Nagar, Special Judicial Magistrate, First Class Aligarh vide his order dated 8-7-1985 after assessing the evidence that was adduced before him came to the conclusion that Raisa Begum was not entitled to any amount of maintenance. He dismissed the petition under Section 125, Cr. P. C.