(1.) BEING aggrieved by the order passed by thelearned Sub -divisional Judl. Magistrate, Puri on 16.3.1990 in Criminal Misc.Case No. 46 of 1989 refusing his prayer to consider the question of maintainability of the proceeding and to drop the proceeding forthwith, the petitionerfiled this application under Sections. 401 and 402, Criminal Procedure Code(shortly referred to as the 'Code') with the prayer to quash the said order andto drop the proceeding. The proceeding before the learned Magistrate wasinitiated on the application filed by the opposite party under Section. 125 of theCode claiming maintenance from the petitioner.
(2.) THE opposite party filed the application under Section 125 of theCode claiming to be the wife of the petitioner which relationship is stronglydenied by the petitioner. It is stated by the petitioner in the revision petitionand not denied by the opposite party that in the application filed under Section125 of the Code, she stated, inter alia, that at the time of marriage she had noknowledge that the petitioner has married another lady previously and furtherthat the petitioner is a shrewed and litigant man and taking advantage of herinnocence and simplicity he cheated her not only in the monetary transactionbut also suppressed the facts of the previous matrimonial relationship andwedlock with one Binapani Das who was living at Bhubaneswar. After twoyears of her marriage she come to know that the petitioner is already marriedto another lady and has his children, the name of his wife is Binapani, that ofhis son is Ramapada Das, aged about 22 years, and that of his daughter isSarmita Das aged about 20 years.
(3.) THEREAFTER the petitioner filed objection in the proceeding initiatedunder Section 125 of the Code raising the objection regarding its maintainabilityin view of the decree of Civil Court disentitling the opposite party from layingany claim as his wife and prayed to the learned Magistrate to consider thepoint and drop the proceeding forthwith. However the learned Magistrateby the impugned order rejected the petition and proceeded to record evidenceadduced on behalf of the opposite party (petitioner before the Magistrate).Hence, the grievance of the petitioner.