SHAREEF AHMAD Vs. HANIFA BEGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a husband's revision against his wife and is directed against the order passed by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Jhansi on 23.7.85. The learned Sessions Judge was disposing of Criminal Revision No. 212 of 1984 and vide his impugned order he set aside the order passed earlier by the Judicial Magistrate Jhansi, who had rejected the application of Smt. Hanifa Bagum under Sec. 125 Criminal Procedure Code The learned Sessions Judge in his revisional judgment directed the payment of Rs. 400.00 per month as, maintenance allowance to Smt. Hanifa Begum from the husband.

(2.) Briefly stated, the admitted facts between the parties were that in Feb., 1980, they were married according to Muslim religious rites. According to the wife for some time behaviour of the husband was good but thereafter he started coming from duty in the night dead drunk and whenever resentment was put forth, he used to beat her, treat her with cruelty and was not caring for her food and clothes. He had an income of Rs. 1500.00 per month from his salary and a house in Shivpuri but because of his bad habits of drinking and gambling he was wasting away his entire income in the evil pursuits. He had even squandered some ornaments and essential family articles. The wife was getting economic aid from her father from time to time but ultimately father showed his inability to help her and when she insisted for the husband to mend his ways, he was badly beaten on 15.6.86 at Gwalior and turned out of the house by the husband. The husband also retained the entire Dahez articles and ornaments and in that pitiable condition the lady came back to her father at Jhansi. Since then she is living with her father and has not been cared for by the husband. She then sent a notice on 8.6.83 which was refused by the husband on 11.6.83 and since then she has not been able to maintain herself. She claimed Rs. 500.00 per month by way of maintenance allowance.

(3.) The husband contested the proceedings by filing a written statement. His contention is that he never ill-treated his wife. He had always been caring for her and the whole story of her being turned out after beating is false. He also says that he is neither a drunkard nor a gambler but a devout Musalman following Qurani injunctions which prohibit gambling and drinking. According to him, the father of the wife is responsible for the present situation. He wants that the husband should live as Ghar Jamai with him which the revisionist is not willing to accept. The petitioner was taken away by the father and brother of Smt. Hanifa Begum in the absence of the husband. She is a teacher in a Muslim Girls Madarsa from where she is getting Rs. 200.00 per month. In addition she also does tailoring and knitting work and she is earning Rs. 200.00 per month from first source and Rs. 100.00 per month from the second. The husband further contends that he is willing to take his wife back and, therefore, she is not entitled to any maintenance allowance.