SAU SAKHUBAI MOTIRAM PINGLE Vs. MOTIRAM RUNJAJI PINGLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner-original applicant, Sakhubai Motiram Pingle, being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 14th August, 1992, passed by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik, dismissing the petitioner's Criminal Revision Application No.371 of 1990. By the impugned judgment and order, the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Nasik, upheld the findings of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nasik-Road, who by his judgment and order dated 7th November, 1990, had rejected the application of the applicant for maintenance made under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) THE case of the applicant-Sakhubai in both the lower Courts was that she was married to the non-applicant, Respondent herein, Motiram Runjaji Pingle, on 27th May, 1979 at Pandhurli according to Hindu rites. According to her, Motiram's first wife Sakhubai died on 24th December, 1978 and on her death, Motiram entered into second marriage with the applicant. Since the first wife's name was Sakhubai, the applicant was also named as Sakhubai. THE marriage took place, according to the applicant, in the presence of one Damu Anna Joshi, who acted as priest. Some other persons were also present. THEir names are, Sadhu Shankar Waje, Punja Govinda Waje, Ramu Mahadu Waje, Murlidhar Kisan Waje and the brothers of the applicant. After the marriage, the applicant went to reside with the non-applicant at Pendharkar Colony and thereafter they shifted to Nehru Nagar. Initially, the non-applicant treated her well for one year and thereafter he started ill-treating her. THE non-applicant tried to obtain signature of the applicant on the divorce deed under the pretext that he was withdrawing money from the Post office. At that time the applicant and the non-applicant were residing along with the children of the non-applicant born from first wife. On 14th September, 1986, the non-applicant went to Makhamalabad along with all his household articles and children. THE applicant also followed him. On 26th December, 1986, the non-applicant married to one Babibai in Someshwar temple when the applicant had gone to the field. She learnt about the marriage of Motiram and Babibai when she returned home in the evening. She then issued notice dated 18th February, 1986 to Motiram, to which he falsely replied and denied the factum of marriage. Motiram then deserted Sakhubai and failed and neglected to maintain her.

(3.) THE learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nasik-Road, by his well reasoned judgment and order dated 7th November, 1990, after hearing both the sides, rejected the application. He came to the conclusion that Sakhubai was not legally wedded wife of Motiram and hence was not entitled to get maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal procedure.