ANURADHA PAL Vs. JEEWAN PAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHEN this matter has been called on for hearing, Mr. R. Thanewala present for the applicant. Non-applicant absent. None appears for him. The record shows that a notice of hearing of this petition was sent to non- applicant. Besides that, it being a revision petition the presence of non-applicant is not necessary because it is the duty of the Court to examine the correctness, propriety and legality of the order which is assailed in this revision petition.

(2.) THE grievance of the applicant-wife is that the learned Court below passed an illegal order against her on 28. 7. 1993 and directed her to pay the expenses and allowance for maintenance of her husband, the non-applicant who has been sent to Civil Jail for 15 days for non-payment of amount of alimony which remained un-paid to applicant-wife.

(3.) MR. R. Thanewala, learned Counsel for applicant made reference to provisions of Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and urged that the order which is being assailed is totally contrary to the provisions of law. It is his argument that when the wife is claiming alimony for her maintenance on the ground that she is unable to maintain herself, it would be totally unfair and illegal to ask her to pay for the expenses of her husband who has been sent to civil jail for non-payment of amount of alimony to her.