SHANKARLAL Vs. MALTIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE husband invokes jurisdiction under sections 397 read with 401 Criminal Procedure Code to challenge the revisional order of the Court of Sessions by which the order of the trial Magistrate dismissing the application for maintenance under section 125 Cr.P.C. was set -aside and instead maintenance of Rs. 400/ - per month was granted with effect from the date of application i.e. 25.1.1983.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner in this Court assails the order of the revisional Court mainly on the ground that the revisional Court almost usurped the jurisdiction of an appellate Court and further wrongly re -appreciated the evidence and came to a conclusion contrary to that of the trial Court.

(3.) THE learned revisional Court in para 4 of its order was wrong when it observed that demanding corroborative evidence from plausible source like that of neighbours is the same thing is as multiplying the evidence. It was not so. It was difficult to rely on the sole testimony of the wife when there was plausible evidence available from the neighbourhood but that was not produced.