MUNISH KAKKAR Vs. NIDHI KAKKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide impugned order dated September 19, 2012, the Additional CJM, SBS Nagar, has allowed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for additional evidence during the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Vide impugned order, the income tax returns of petitioner husband for the year 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 have been permitted to be produced in evidence.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has acted illegally in summoning the said returns as the petitioner has already examined his employer alongwith the record of his salary in the year 2005. It is claimed by counsel for the petitioner that the application has been allowed without following the principles of Section 311 Cr.P.C.

(3.) I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and I am of the opinion that the determination of the income of husband is the most material aspect of the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to determine the extent of liability to pay maintenance to the wife. The discretion under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to summon any witness or to recall or re-examining any person already examined can be exercised if it appears essential to the just decision of the case. It will be premature to express any opinion that the income tax returns for the years 2009 to 2012 are not essential for the just decision of the case. No ground is made out for interfering in the order dated September 15, 2012.