(1.) VIDE order dated 26.7.1999 the learned JMFC, Waraseoni in MJC No. 71/1991 directed that the applicant shall be provided a maintenance of Rs. 300/ - per month under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C., by the respondent and the previous maintenance be also paid. In Criminal Revision No. 128 of 1999 the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Waraseoni vide order 9.11.2000 set aside the maintenance order passed by the trial Court and dismissed the maintenance application of the applicant. Being aggrieved with the order dated 9.11.2000 passed by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Waraseoni, the applicant has preferred the present revision.
(2.) THE facts of the case in short are that, the applicant moved a maintenance application on 20.6.1990, that her marriage took place on 25.6.1988 and immediately after the marriage, the custom of gauna took place and she was sent to the house of the respondent. The applicant was kept with comfort for 4 -5 months, thereafter she was harassed and quarrel took place. Father of the respondent was a bad character person who, tried to create illicit relations with the applicant. The applicant told about that fact to the respondent and his mother but, on the contrary they blamed upon her that she was a characterless woman. The applicant was beaten by the respondent and his father in between 5.5.1989 to 7.5.1989 and thereafter, a letter was sent to father of the applicant with various allegations of her character. So on 8.5.1989, father of the applicant came to the house of the respondent and took the applicant on 9.5.1989. It is also pleaded that she was directed to sign a document relating to divorce forcefully and that document was neither read to the applicant or her father. An FIR was lodged by the applicant at Police Station, Katangi on 15.5.1989 and a criminal case was tried against the respondent and his family members. The applicant pleaded about her dependency and income of the respondent and therefore, she claimed a maintenance of Rs. 500/ - per month from the respondent. The pleading was modified in the year 1994, that the respondent entered into a second marriage with one Chhoti Bai and a girl child was also born to the respondent with Chhoti Bai on 22.11.1993. It was also mentioned that Chhoti Bai is now known as Laxmi Bai and therefore, the maintenance was demanded due to second marriage of the respondent.
(3.) THE learned JMFC after considering the evidence adduced by the parties, granted a maintenance of Rs. 300/ - per month and also directed the respondent to pay the remaining interim maintenance. In Criminal Revision No. 128/1999 the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Waraseoni dismissed the maintenance order passed by the JMFC, Waraseoni as well as the application under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C.