ASHA ANIL DESHMUKH Vs. ANIL MAHADEORAO DESHMUKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this criminal application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the applicant challenges the order passed by the trial Court by which the trial Court has allowed the application of the non-applicant No. 1 to adduce the evidence.

(2.) THE undisputed facts are that the present applicant is the wife of non-applicant No. 1 Anil who were married in the year 1984. It seems that there is one son out of this wedlock who is living with the non-applicant. Be that as it may, the relations between the applicant and her husband were strained and ultimately the applicant filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narkhed. A specific defence was raised in this by the husband. Apart from denying that he had meted out any ill-treatment to his wife, he specifically alleged that the present applicant was serving as a teacher in Kranti-Jyoti Savitribai Fuley Kanya Vidyalaya, Narkhed and was getting the salary of Rs. 1200/- to Rs. 1400/- per month. He claimed that she was able to maintain herself and was not in the need of any maintenance from her husband. The parties went to the evidence. During the evidence also, the non-applicant submitted that the applicant was serving in Kranti-Jyoti Savitribai Fuley Kanya Vidyalaya at Narkhed as a teacher. However, he was not able to produce any evidence regarding the salary being drawn by the present applicant. The non-applicant also went to the extent of examining the Headmistress one Vijaya Aswal as a witness for him and her evidence was also relied upon by the non-applicant to show that the applicant was gainfully employed as a teacher. Be that as it may, on the basis of the evidence led before it, the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narkhed allowed the application and awarded the maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from the date of filing of application. After this order, a revision came to be filed at the instance of the husband but the revision came to be dismissed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur who confirmed the order. Thus, the order of grant of maintenance became final. The parties report that there was no further challenge to the order.

(3.) THE applicant thereafter started execution by way of an application which registered as Misc. Criminal Application No. 55/93. In all there appear, to be two recovery proceedings, one by the aforementioned Misc. Criminal Application No. 55/93 and the other by Misc. Criminal Application No. 29/94. The total arrears claimed in the first application are Rs. 28,300/- while in the second one the claimed arrears are Rs. 6350/ -. These applications were stiffly opposed by the present non-applicant who gave separate replies to both the applications and contended in those replies that in fact the applicant was employed as an assistant teacher in Kranti-Jyoti Savitribai Fuley Kanya Vidyalaya, Narkhed and was drawing the salary and allowances as per provisions contained in the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and that she had given a false evidence stating that she had no job. It vas also suggested that even Vijaya Aswal who was examined in that case and who was serving as a Headmistress of the said school had also given false evidence. It was suggested in paragraph 9 that an inspection was carried out by Education Extension Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Narkhed and a report was submitted on 3-2-1992 and in that report he had suggested that he had given a statement of teachers employed in the said school wherein the name of the present applicant appeared as a teacher at serial No. 8. It was also mentioned in the said statement that her basic salary was Rs. 1200/- per month. It was, therefore, contended that she was actually drawing the emoluments of Rs. 2500/- per month and on that count she had given a false evidence. It was also suggested that the documents like the report, the inspection note, etc. were maintained by the school in the regular course of business and it was, therefore, prayed that the court in its inherent jurisdiction should call upon the school authorities as well as the Panchayat Samiti and the Education Officer to produce all the documents in connection with the employment of the applicant. It was, therefore, stated that the order obtained by the wife from the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narkhed was as a result of fraud played upon the Court and was a nullity. A declaration was sought in the prayer that the orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class as well as that of the revisional Court should be declared as a nullity and that the Court should proceed against the applicant for giving false evidence. The replies are almost common in both the Misc. Criminal Cases.