VIJAYKUMAR HIRALAL GUPTA Vs. MIRA VIJAYKUMAR GUPTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENT No.1- Mira had filed application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, against the petitioner in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Ulhasnagar, viz. Misc. Application No.126/97. The petitioner appeared and filed written statement, but on the date fixed for hearing of the matter, petitioner remained absent and that is how, the learned Magistrate found that absence of the petitioner was wilful and proceeded with the matter exparte and on the basis of the evidence of Respondent-Mira, passed an order granting monthly allowance in favour of the respondent-Mira and the same is straightaway impugned in this Revision Application.

(2.) I have heard Shri Singh for the petitioner for sufficiently long time. Today, he has tendered an affidavit showing that notice of this revision application along with pay order of Rs.5,000/- was sought to be served on respondent No.1, but respondent No.1 refused to accept the same.

(3.) THE other decision relied upon by Shri Singh is decision of this Court in Ramesh Laxman Contractor vs. Mrs. Jayshreeben Ramesh Contractor, 1982 Cri.L.J. 1460. In particular paras 5 and 6 are relied upon. After going through the same, it would at once appear that the learned Magistrate in that case proceeded straightaway to pass order of monthly allowance when husband was absent and no evidence was led. Again this decision is distinguishable from the facts of the present case. In the present proceedings, evidence has been recorded by the learned Magistrate and on the basis of that evidence and the documents, he has passed the order of maintenance.