NARESH CHANDRA Vs. RESHMA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is whether in absence of facts essential to constitute valid marriage in an application u/ S. 125, Cr. P.C., the Court can award interim compensation in favour of the spouse?

(2.) Non-applicant No. 1 Reshmabai conceived as a result of her premarital affair with the petitioner whose reluctance to own his involvement landed him in the dock to answer charge of rape on a report lodged by Reshma's mother in the police station. This pressure tactics worked and in order to wriggle out of this quagmire, the petitioner accepted the lady and the infant child non-applicant No. 2, who had come in the world by this time by exchanging garlands in Gayatri temple. The criminal case naturally ended in acquittal. But this tenuous tie could not last long and non-applicant No. 1 was deserted giving rise to her application u/ S. 125, Cr. P. C. for maintenance to herself and her son non-applicant No. 2. In that Misc. Criminal Case No. 61/89 vide order dated 16-5-1989, application for interim maintenance was rejected. Revision No. 65/ 89 against the said order was allowed by 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Raigarh vide order dated 2-4-1990, which is under challenge in this revision.

(3.) Petitioner's learned counsel did not question the award of Rs. 200/- p.m. as interim maintenance for the minor child but assailed the award in favour of non-applicant No. 1 on the ground that there being no averment of facts constituting valid Hindu marriage the impugned order is patently erroneous and liable to be set aside. Reliance has been placed on Sumitra Devi v. Bhiken Choudhary, 1985 Cri LJ 528 : AIR 1985 SC 765 wherein it has been held (at p. 766 of AIR):