EKNATH Vs. BHAGWANTABAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. is directed against the older dated 23 -7 -85 passed by the Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No. 36/84 thereby affirming the order of maintenance dt. 10 -12 -83 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Indore in Misc. Cri. Case No 45/82 awarding Rs. 125 as monthly maintenance allowance to the respondent who is a divorced wife but it is not disputed that she is entitled to maintenance allowance so long as she does not remarry. Explanation (B) to Section 125 fully covers her case.

(2.) THE only point raised by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is, that both the Courts have over -looked that an essential ingredient of Section 125 Cr. P. C. has not been made out.

(3.) THAT there is absolutely no allegation either of 'neglect' or 'refusal' on the part of the petitioner to maintain his wife and there is no finding on this point. The trial Court's order is short and is obviously silent on this point. But respondents application, contains a statement to the effect that the opposite party (the present petitioner has) for no reason deserted the applicant. Similarly in paragraph 4, she has stated that she had no means to maintain herself. The petitioner in his reply has denied these allegations, and further pleaded that it was the respondent wife who had, with un -reasonable excuse deserted the petitioner. The tenor and purpose of Bhagwantabai's evidence is also indicative of both, 'refusal' as well as 'neglect'. The Courts below have not adverted to this aspect of the matter in their orders, but that is not to say that there is total look of material averment on this point. Strictly speaking the Court before passing an order under section 125 Cr. P. C. about maintenance allowance payable to the wife, has to reach and record a finding that the wife is neglected by the husband and that the husband possessed of means has refused to maintain his wife who is unable to maintain herself. These are the essential postulates of an order under section 125 Cr. P. C. The lower Revisional Court, it appears, as also not adverted to this aspect of the matter. As observed above, it is not a case of lack of material averments constituting essential ingredients of section 125 Cr. P. C. on the basis of which the exitence of these essentials can well be deduced although the Courts below have failed to do so. But section 125 Cr. P. C. have a social purpose, its various clauses in their interpretation must receive a compassionate expense by the Court in its generous jurisdiction, a broader perspective and appreciation of facts and their bearing on essential ingredients must govern the ultimate verdict not choppoing little logic or tinkering with the inceties of interpretation and technicalities of law.