CHANDARSINGH Vs. NANIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a husband's criminal revision under Section 397, Cr. P. C. against the judgment passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, in Criminal Revision No. 115/1997 dated 22. 9. 1999 whereby he allowed the revision of wife and awarded Rs. 500/- per month to Nanibai and her two daughters reversing the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Narsinghgarh in Criminal Case No. 3/96 dated 22. 7. 1999 by which the application filed by the non-applicants' wife was dismissed.

(2.) THE admitted facts on record are that the non-applicant No. 1 Nanibai is a married wife of the applicant. Marriage took place 20 years before. Manjubai aged 9 years and Antibai aged 6 years are the two daughters. The non-applicant No. 1 Nanibai filed an application before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Narsinghgarh for claiming maintenance on the ground that the applicant was practising cruelty on her and she has been driven away with her two daughters from the house of the applicant on the ground that she is suffering from T. B. It was further alleged that the applicant performed 'natra' with another woman Indarbai and the applicant is also haying two sons and one daughter with Indarbai, the second wife of the applicant. She is also residing with the applicant for the last 10 years. It was further alleged that the applicant is having 30-40 acres of irrigated land with well for irrigation and 4-5 bufffaloes and also having huge income of Rs. one lac per year from agricultural land and Rs. ten thousand from selling of milk. Therefore, she claimed a maintenance allowance of Rs. 700/- each for her and two daughters from the applicant. In reply the applicant denied all the allegations and submitted that 'natra' was done with the consent of non-applicant No. 1 Nanibai and second wife Indarbai is living with the consent of non-applicant No. 1 Nanibai. It was further submitted that the applicant is willing to keep the non-applicant No. 1 Nanibai with him but she herself wants to reside separately because she is suffering from T. B. and it was prayed that the application be dismissed.

(3.) IN the Trial Court, non-applicant Nanibai herself examined as PW1 and also examined PW 2 Kahwarlal, applicant DW1 examined himself and also examined Onkar Singh DW 2, Chander Singh DW 3, Nathulal and DW 4 Kanwal Lai. PW 1 Nanibai in her statement denied the fact that she is suffering from T. B. The learned Trial Court by order dated 22. 7. 1999 rejected the application on the ground that the applicant has performed 'natra' with the consent of non-applicant No. 1 Nanibai and her two daughters and Nanibai is residing separately of her own choice. Therefore she is not entitled for the maintenance from the applicant.