NARAYAN MEHER Vs. MUKTA MEHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 30.01.2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barpali in Crl. Misc. Case No.34 of 2001 granting maintenance of Rs.500/ - per month in favour of each of the opposite parties under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which has been confirmed by the judgment dated 29.07.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (F.T.C.) Bargarh in Criminal Revision No.14 of 2003.

(2.) THE present opposite party Nos.1 and 2 were respectively petitioner Nos.1 and 2 and the present petitioner was the opposite party in Crl. Misc. Case No.34 of 2001 in The Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barpali the opposite parties filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure praying for monthly maintenance of Rs.1000/ - each from the present petitioner. Their case, in brief, is that the opposite party No.1 and the petitioner were in love with each other and had physically relationship and both of them lived together as wife and husband in the house of the petitioner in their village. While living together they entered into matrimony in a marriage ceremony performed in the house of the present petitioner in presence of village gentries, relations and caste people. Out of their relationship, opposite party No.2, Pramod was born in the year 1999. After the birth of opposite party No.2, the health condition of opposite party No.1 deteriorated and the petitioner started rebuking and neglecting her and did not provide food and medicines. The petitioner and his family members also tortured her both physically and mentally on the pretext that her father had not given sufficient dowry at the time of marriage. At the instance of opposite party No.1, a Panchayat was convened, but the petitioner disregarded the decision taken in the said panchayati for which the opposite parties were forced to take shelter in another house of the petitioner in the same village and were depending upon the charity and mercy of others. It is the further case of the opposite parties that the petitioner is working as a Primary School Teacher and getting monthly salary of Rs.4500/ - besides having cultivable lands in the village.

(3.) IN the proceeding before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barpali, the opposite parties examined five witnesses including opposite party No.1 as P.W.5 and also led into evidence the birth certificate and vaccination card of opposite party No.2 and true copy of the electoral roll which have been marked as Exts. 1, 2 and 3. The present petitioner examined three witnesses including himself as O.P.W. No.1. On consideration of the evidence led by the parties, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class came to hold that opposite party No.1 is the legally married wife of the petitioner and opposite party No.2 is their child and that the petitioner neglected and refused to provide maintenance to the opposite parties, who are unable to maintain themselves. Accordingly, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class. Barpali passed the order directing the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.500/ - to each of the opposite parties from the date of filling of the maintenance application.