RAMAMANI DEI Vs. BENUDHAR PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have preferred this revision challenging the judgment dated 13-3-95 passed by the learned J.M.F.C., Nimapara in Crl. Misc. Case No. 35 of 1987 under S.125, Cr.P.C.She has impugned the order refusing to grant maintenance.

(2.) As it reveals from the lower Court record, petitioner No. 1 claiming herself to be the legally married wife of the opposite party and petitioner No. 2 to be their daughter and alleging desertion, cruelty and lack of means to sustain their livelihood prayed for maintenance from opposite party stating that opposite party has sufficient means to pay the maintenance. In their application u/S.125, Cr.P.C.petitioner No. 1 stated that because of intimacy between herself and opposite party, they performed secret marriage by exchange of garland in the local Radhakanta temple and when she conceived and it was known to the relations and the co-villagers, the family of the opposite party backed out. However, on the persuasion of the petitioner and the villagers on 8-5-1987 opposite party married her in accordance with the prevailing rituals. Thereafter, there was demand of dowry and when the same was not fulfilled, she was driven out from the house of the opposite party on 8-6-1987 even though she was pregnant. On 14-8-1987 she gave birth to a female child i.e. petitioner No. 2. Opposite party not only refused to receive her back, but also searched for a bride for marriage and also neglected and refused to maintain her. In the meantime as stated by her in her evidence, opposite party has already married to another woman.

(3.) In his show cause, opposite party denied to the relationship and the factum of marriage either in the temple or in the alter as alleged in the petition by the petitioner No. 1. He pleaded that petitioner No. 1 is a lady of easy virtue and having illicit relationship with her brother-in-law (sister's husband) she conceived. He further pleaded that because of the family rivalry between the two families, false case has been set up to harass and humiliate him. He also denied to the alleged source of income and accordingly prayed to dismiss the cases.