RAJENDRA NATH GHOSE Vs. BROJABALA GHOSE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule raises a question of some importance as respects the manner of enforcement of an order made by a Magistrate under the provisions of Section 488, Criminal P. C.

(2.) By an order dated 7-3-1955 a learned Magistrate of Howrah directed payment of a monthly maintenance allowance of Rs. 30/- by the petitioner to his wife. There was a further order as respects the payment of costs of hearing of the maintenance application which amounted to Rs. 40/-. On 12-4-1955 the wife in whose favour the order had been made applied for enforcement of the order. Notice by registered post requiring the payment of maintenance allowance of Rs. 30/- as also a further sum of Rs. 40/- by way of costs was issued upon the petitioner but the notice having been refused a distress warrant was directed to issued upon the general manager of the National Iron and Steel Works Ltd., of which the petitioner is an employee, requiring the manager to attach Rs.70/- from the pay of the petitioner and to remit the amount thus realised to Court by 5-5-1955. On 11-5-1955 intimation was received from the National Steel and Iron Works Ltd., that a sum of Rs. 70/- less the money order commission had been sent to the wife of the petitioner. When that intimation was received the learned Magistrate recorded an order that the case had been disposed of. On 15-6-1955 a further application was made by the wife for enforcement of the order of maintenance and the learned Magistrate repeated the process of enforcement of the order and directed issue of distress warrant on the General Manager of the Company to attach a sum of Rs. 60/- from the salary of the petitioner and to remit the same to the wife by money order by a certain date named) In the order. The petitioner thereafter applied to this Court and obtained the present Rule.

(3.) Mr. Sen Gupta appearing In support of the Rule has urged that the procedure adopted by the learned Magistrate is unknown to law. He has contended that in view of the provisions contained in Section 488, Criminal P. C., the learned Magistrate completely misdirected himself by directing the Manager of the Company to attach a definite sum of money out of the petitioner's salary and directing its payment to the wife of the petitioner. This contention requires examination.