(1.) The instant revisional application under section, 401 and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 19.4.2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Barasat, in M. Ex. Case No. 50 of 97. By the impugned order the learned Court below rejected the petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act and the petition under section 126(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed by the present petitioner who figures as opposite party in the said case before the learned Magistrate.
(2.) The facts anterior to the filing of the revision application may briefly be narrated as follows:- The present O.P. No. 1 wife filed the petition under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code claiming maintenance before the learned Court below. The said maintenance case was ultimately heard ex-parte and by the order dated 3.6.97 passed in M. cases No. 169 of 1995, maintenance was awarded at the rate of Rs. 800/- (Rupees Eight Hundred) per month in favour of the wife and Rs. 350/- (Rupees Three Hundred Fifty) per month in favour of her minor son with effect from the date of filing of the petition. Since the husband did not take any step for payment of maintenance in terms of the order of the Court, the Execution Case being M. Ex case No. 50 of 1997 was initiated by the wife against the husband in the Court below for realisation of arrears of maintenance. It is at that stage the husband moved the learned Court below with a petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act along with the petition under section 126(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(3.) The learned Judicial Magistrate on considering the materials on record has arrived at the finding that the present petitioner/husband has failed to afford any satisfactory ground on the basis of which delay can be condoned and in that view of the matter the petition under section 5 of the Limitation Act and the petition under section 126(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been rejected.