P BRAHMAIAH Vs. P PADMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondents who are the wife and children of the petitioner, have filed two petitions for maintenance u/s 125 Cr.P.C. i.e., M.C. Nos. 7/ 84 and 4/85, in the Court of the II Additional Munsif Magistrate, Ongole, who by his order dt. 24-2-1987, granted them maintenance @ Rs. 200/- per month. Not satisfied with that, they preferred a revision to the Sessions Judge, who enhanced the maintenance to Rs. 275/- per month by his order dt. 13-4-1988. Then they have filed Crl.M.P. No. 785/88 in the Court of the II Additional Munsif Magistrate for enforcing the arrears of maintenance of Rs. 7,525/- by sending the petitioner to jail. The learned Magistrate ordered that the petitioner should be sent to jail for a period of 24 months. Against that, a revision was filed in Crl. Revision Petition No. 123/ 88 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Ongole, which was dismissed. As against that, this petition is filed.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to the proviso to sub'sec. (3) of Section 125 Cr.P.C. which reads as follows :

(3.) But the contention of the learned counsel for the respondents (wife and children) is that as the order in the revision was passed on 13-4-1988, by which the order of maintenance became final, the petition for execution of the order of maintenance was filed on 11-5-1988, which is within the period of 12 months. He referred to the decision in Ataullah vs. Maimunnisa Begum in which another learned single Judge of this Court observed as follows :