SUSHILABEN PADMAKANTSONI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This proceeding depicts the discord in the marital life of the two spouses. The petitioner was married to the second respondent on December 5. 1968 as per Hindu Rites in Bombay. After the marriage ceremony she resided with the husband for some time having good hopes for the future about the merried life. However, to her utter dismay the hopes shattered inasmuch as within 10 days there after her mother in-law started quarrelling with her. Ten months after the marriage, she went for delivery to her parent's house where she gave birth to, her daughter Jagruti, She thereafter came back to the matrimonial abode and resided for some time, but she was again subjected to illtreatment. A dispute was then settled through the intervention of some common friends who are called the arbitrators. This was some time in August 1973 and tney had suggested that trie mother-in-law should reside separate as they thought that she was perhaps the cause for the illtreatment to the wife. However, inspite of that the mother-in law did not shift and the wife was again subjected to the illtreatment The petitioner-wife then gave birth to another daughter by the name Parul The wife was then assaulted by respondent-husband and driven but of the house on account of which she was compelled to stay at ihe destitute women's house at Worli known as 'Bapnu Ghar' for about 18 days. Thereafter, the father of the petitioner took her to his house Thereafter she filed an application for maintenance in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate. 26 th Court. Borivli being No. 160/N of 1976. That application, however, came to be compromised and the settlement was allowed by the learned Magistrate on 12th October 1976. It was submitted in the terms of the settlement that the husband had under taken not to illtreat the wife either by himself or through his relations. With the other parts of the terms we are not very much concerned in this proceeding.

(2.) In pursuance of the compromise, the wife went back to reside with her husband quite for some time, and thereafter there was repeated performance. In January 1977. accotding to the petitioner- wife, there was short of a climax in the scene in that as she was preparing some food, her mother-in-law poured kerosene oil over her body and tried to set fire to her clothes She immediatly informed the police by lodging a formal complaint and thereafter she was taken back to the parent's house and since then she is staying there and the husband has not bothered even to look-after her or to give maintenance. According to the wife, the respondent-husband was getting Rs. 900/- per month as the income.

(3.) On all these allegations, the petitioner-wife filed an application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being the subject of Criminal Case No. 67/N/77 in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 26th Court Borivli claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month for her minor daughter and Rs. 300/- for herself.