PROMOD YESHWANT CHAWAN Vs. SUNITA PROMOD CHAWAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision application has been filed by the husband who was opponent in an application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class at Thana. That application was filed by his wife who had been married to him in the year 1972 on ground that in August 1972 the husband had driven her away out of his house and it was not possible for her to return to his house because he was treating her in a cruel manner. In the Court below evidence was led on behalf of both the parties. In support of her application the wife examined herself.

(2.) The learned trial Magistrate accepted her evidence and a come to the conclusion that the petitioner husband refused and neglected to maintain the respondent wife. He also fixed the quantum of maintenance at Rs. 100/- p.m. having regard to the salary of Rs. 455-30 p.m. which the petitioner was earning. This he did by his order dated 30th November, 1976.

(3.) Against that order of maintenance the petitioner has approached this Court by this petition which has been supported before me by Mr. D.K. Ghaisas the learned Advocate. Mr. Ghaisas has criticised the judgment of the Court below on four grounds. In the first place he stated that the learned trial Magistrate was not justified in relying upon the sole testimony of the respondent relating to the ill-treatment given to her. It is impossible for me to accept this submission of Mr. Ghaisas. The law of evidence does not require any particular number of witnesses to prove a case. Even in important criminal cases it has been held repeatedly by the courts that a testimony of a single witness can be made the sole basis of conviction. In matters affecting the personal lives of the parties it is hardly imaginable that the Court should insist upon the examination of two witnesses.