LAWS(MPH)-2009-8-160

JASODABAI Vs. BHAGWANSINGH

Decided On August 03, 2009
JASODABAI Appellant
V/S
BHAGWANSINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order dated 16-4-2008 passed by Sessions Judge, Shajapur in Criminal Revision No. 22/2008 whereby the order dated 27-12-2007 passed by JMFC, Sarangpur, in Case No. 4/2000 whereby the maintenance was awarded @ Rs. 800/- per month was set aside, the present petition has been filed.

(2.) Short facts of the case are that the petitioner filed a petition under Section 125 of Cr.PC for grant of maintenance on 13-1-2006, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner is the wife of respondent. It was alleged that petitioner is illiterate lady. It was alleged that the respondent is Teacher and the marriage of petitioner was solemnized with the respondent in her childhood. It was alleged that the petitioner was subjected to cruelty on account of demand of dowry. Further case of the petitioner was that petitioner was ousted from the matrimonial house before 8 years of filing of the petition. It was also alleged that petitioner has performed second marriage with one Krishnabai. It was prayed that the petition filed by the petitioner be allowed and the maintenance be awarded @a Rs. 4,000/- per month. The application was contested by the respondent on various grounds and also on the ground that the petitioner is not the wedded wife of the respondent and marriage of the respondent never took place with the petitioner. So far as allegation made in the petition that the respondent has entered into second marriage with Krishnahai is concerned, it was replied that the marriage of the respondent has not taken place with Krishnabai. It was prayed that petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed. After holding summary enquiry learned Trial Court allowed the petition and awarded maintenance @ Rs. 800/- per month to petitioner against which revision petition was filed by the respondent. After hearing both the parties, learned Revisional Court allowed the revision petition filed by the respondent and set aside the order passed by learned Trial Court whereby maintenance was awarded @ Rs. 800/- per month to the petitioner, against which the present petition has been filed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner argued at length and submits that the impugned order passed by learned Revisional Court is illegal and deserves to be set aside. It is submitted that since jurisdiction of Revisional Court was limited and after due appreciation of evidence learned Trial Court came to the conclusion that petitioner is entitled for maintenance and awarded maintenance @ Rs. 800/- per month, therefore, while exercising the revisional jurisdiction learned Sessions Court exceeded its jurisdiction in setting aside the findings of learned Trial Court. Learned Counsel placed reliance on a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Dwarika Prasad Satpathy Vs. Bidyut Prava Dixit, 2000 CrLJ 1, wherein it has held that in it maintenance proceedings, strict proof is not required, it is sufficient, if claimant prima facie satisfies the Court that claimant and her husband lived as husband and wife, performance of essential ceremonies need not also be proved.