BABURAO Vs. PANCHAFULABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Revision Application no 169 of 1985 can be disposed of on the ground that it is a second revision directed against the order passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Mehkar in Criminal Case no. 54 of 1984 on 1.12.1994 directing the revision petitioner to pay Rs. 250.00 per month to the non-applicant Smt. Panchafulabai for her maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Procedure. The revision filed by the applicant before the learned Sessions Judge, Buldana bearing Criminal Revision no. 43 of 1983 was dismissed on 13.5.1985. Sec. 397(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code is as under :

(2.) The learned Advocate Shri A.V. Mohta for the applicant wanted this Court to invoke inherent powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for interference in the impugned order. I am afraid, this course cannot be taken. Sec. 482 has to be resorted to only in exceptional cases and that too where there is a blatant abuse of the process of law which is not the case here. The applicant had moved the learned Sessions Judge, Buldana in Criminal Revision no. 43 of 1985 and the said revision was dismissed. The present revision application is, therefore. not tenable in view of the bar under section 397(3) of the Code (if Criminal Procedure.

(3.) In the result, the revision application is hereby dismissed.