(1.) This revisional application is directed against the judgment and order dated 12th September, 2001 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Kalyani, Nadia in Misc. Case No. 25/95 which arose out of a petition under Section 125 Cr. P.C. by Rakhi Mohanta praying for maintenance against Sri Animesh Mohanta stated to be her husband. The learned Magistrate after considering the evidence led by the parties and the arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for both sides came to the conclusion that the alleged marriage between the parties had been proved and the ingredients of section 125 Cr. P.C. had been satisfied and accordingly he allowed the petition awarding maintenance of Rs. 1000/- per month payable by the husband Animesh Mohanta to the petitioner wife, Rakhi Mohanta. He also imposed a cost of Rs. 10,000/- in favour of the petitioner wife to be paid by the husband.
(2.) Being aggrieved by this order the O.P., Animesh Mohanta, has preferred this present revisional application challenging the impugned order as erroneous, illegal, improper and liable to be set aside.
(3.) The case of the petitioner Animesh Mohanta is that the O.P. Rakhi Mohanta, was not legally married by him as alleged and prior to such alleged marriage the married Binita Mohanta according to Hindu rites in 1991, and has been residing with Binita who gave birth to a male child in 1996. According to him the alleged marriage having not been proved to be valid at all, the O.P. could not be entitled to get any maintenance from him as awarded by the learned Magistrate and on that score the impugned order being illegal is liable to be set aside.