JOGINDER PAUL BAGGA Vs. PREMI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INVOKING power under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Code in short) read with Section 397/401 of the Code, the petitioner had challenged the legality and validity of the Judgment and Order dated 19. 05. 2003, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur in Criminal Motion Case No. 36 (S-4)/2002, whereby the learned Sessions Judge allowed the revision petition by setting aside the Judgment and Order dated 21. 09. 2002 passed in M. C. No. 132/2001 by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (S) (SDJM in short), Tezpur, Sonitpur.

(2.) THE respondent as 1st party filed an application under Section 125 of the Code in the Court of the SDJM, Tezpur, Sonitpur, against the petitioner herein being the Misc. Case No. 132/2001 alleging inter alia therein that the respondent (1st party) was married to the petitioner (2nd party) on 15. 02. 1999 and since then both of them lived together as husband and wife at the rented house of one Sri Gaman Sing Sherpa at Latihapara village under Missamari Police Station from where the petitioner (2nd party) attended his service. The petitioner (2nd party) is a driver, posted at IMTART, C/o 99 APO, drawing a salary of Rs. 7000/- (Rupees Seven thousand) only per month. The petitioner (2nd party) thereafter, was transferred to IMTART, C/o 99 APO at Hashimara, District-Jalpaiguri, West Bengal and there also both the parties lived together as husband and wife in the house belonging to one Mrs. Moti Singh. The respondent wife alleged that the 2nd party was a heavy drunker and he gradually began to leave her alone in the house and used to come late at night. He also used to beat her and drove her out from her house many a times. Some time the 2nd party, husband, threatened her with dire consequences if she would not leave the house of 2nd Party. She thus finding no other alternative left her matrimonial house and began to live alone without any source of income. As she had no income she requested the 2nd party husband to pay her maintenance, to which he did not pay any head. According to the respondent wife, the 2nd party husband draws salary of Rs. 7000/- (Rupees Seven thousand) per month. In the aforesaid circumstances, the first party wife filed the Misc. Case being M. C. No. 132/2001, in the Court of the SDJM (S), Tezpur, praying inter alia therein for a direction to the second party husband to pay Rs. 3000/- (Rupees Three thousand) per month as maintenance to her.

(3.) ON receipt of the notice, the 2nd party husband had entered appearance and filed a written statement of defence denying the statements made by the 1st party wife. The 2nd party in his written statement denied the marriage with the 1st party and stated that he is an employee of IMTART and presently posted at Mangalbari, Jaygaon, where he is living with his wife Smt. Santosh Kumari with four children (two sons and two daughters) and that his marriage with Santosh Kumari was solemnized in the year 1975. He further contended that the 1st party was known to him when he was posted at Missamari in Sonitpur district. According to him, the 1st party is a married women and name of her husband is Sri Puspa Kanta Nath. She has three children, two sons and one daughter, namely, Ratul Nath, Mitul Nath and Malabika Nath and they are residing permanently with their father Puspa Kanta Nath at village Sonajuli under Sonitpur District. He further contended that the 1st party being not his married wife, he is not liable to pay maintenance allowance to her and thus prayed for dismissal of the petition of the 1st party.