SHRAVAN NATHU KONNOR Vs. ANJANABAI SHRAVAN KONNOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a husbands petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik, passed under section 125, Criminal Procedure Code in revision, directing him to pay a monthly allowance of Rs. 50/- to the respondent No. 1 who is his wife.

(2.) Most of the facts are no longer in dispute. The parties married each other around 1967, when the wife was still a minor. The wife came to reside with the husband about the year 1974. As they could not pull on well together she went back to her parents. There was some litigation between the parties, which was amicably settled. Thereafter the wife again joined the husband under the marital roof. However, after 8 or 10 dayss stay with him she again went back to her parents. Thereafter in July 1977 the wife preferred an application to the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Malegaon, under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code for fixation of maintenance. Apart from the plea of refusal and neglect to maintain her, the wife also alleged that the husband had contracted a second marriage or was living with a mistress. The husband denied all these allegations. Here it may be stated that although he had not raised a specific plea in his reply that she was living in adultery with one Mahadu Pira, evidence was sought to be led on the issue. The learned Magistrate, however, rejected the application of the husband for adjournment of the case for adducing evidence on this aspect.

(3.) The learned Magistrate held that the wife had failed to prove that the husband had neglected to maintain her. He also negatived her plea that the husband had taken a second wife or was keeping a mistress. Eventually the learned Magistrate dismissed the wifes petition, without considering the husbands allegations of her living in adultery. In revision, disagreeing with the learned Magistrate, the learned Additional Sessions Judge found that the husband had neglected to maintain the wife and that she was unable to maintain herself, although he had sufficient means to provide maintenance to her. The learned Magistrates finding was however confirmed that the second marriage of the husband or his living with a mistress was not proved. The learned Judge considered the question of the wifes living in adultery and recorded a negative finding on the point. Eventually he allowed the revision and directed the husband to pay a monthly allowance of Rs. 50/- to her.