REENA RANI Vs. RAJWINDER ALIAS RAJU SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A Mohammedan couple, with Hindu names, is on the path of litigation. Reena Rani, the petitioner filed an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance allowance. In the said application, she had applied for interim maintenance. The said application was allowed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sunam, vide order dated 19.11.2011, a sum of Rs.2000/- per month was directed to be paid to her by her husband as interim maintenance. Challenging the said order, Rajwinder alias Raju Singh has filed a revision petition, which was accepted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur and the order of learned Magistrate was set aside and the parties were directed to appear before learned trial court for further proceedings.

(2.) Dis-satisfied with that order, the wife has come to this court by way of this revision petition under section 401 Cr.P.C.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the Magistrate has taken into consideration all the circumstances and fixed Rs.2000/- per month as interim maintenance. According to him, the Magistrate had rejected the plea of the respondenthusband that she has some source of income. According to him, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur mentioned the fact that parties were divorced. According to him, there was nothing of this nature in the case and learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur has created this fact out of nothing. According to him, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sangrur taking into account the fact that the parties have divorced and that under Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 the wife is entitled to reasonable and fair provisions and maintenance during the period of iddat , has found the petitioner to be not entitled to any maintenance. He has placed reliance on a decision of Hon'ble Orissa High Court in Rashida Khanum v. S.K. Salim,1996 AIHC 1001.