LAWS(P&H)-2013-7-400

DEEPAK PANCHAL Vs. BHAVANA PANCHAL AND ANOTHER

Decided On July 25, 2013
Deepak Panchal Appellant
V/S
Bhavana Panchal And Another Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has approached this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') for quashing orders dated 26.08.2010 (Annexure P1) and 27.08.2011 (Annexure P2), passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra and order dated 23.05.2013 (Annexure P3), passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. A perusal of the records reveal that the petitioner has been directed to pay maintenance allowance to his wife Bhavna Panchal and Mannat, minor daughter of the parties in proceedings under Section 125 of the Code. As the petitioner failed to pay maintenance allowance in compliance with the order passed by the Court, conditional warrant of arrest has been issued against him in execution proceedings initiated under Section 128 of the Code.

(2.) THE petitioner earlier filed CRM M 29325 of 2011, invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code, to assail the orders passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra, again sought to challenge in the present petition. The said petition was disposed of by this Court. A relevant extract from order dated 14.02.2013 passed in the aforesaid petition is quoted hereinunder: -

(3.) ON due consideration of the entire facts stated hereinabove, it appears that the petitioner is guilty of abusing and misusing the process of law and wasting the time of the Court. It is strange rather incomprehensible that as the petitioner earlier withdrew the petition filed under Section 482 of the Code, without any permission by this Court to file a fresh petition, on the same cause of action, he again approached this Court, invoking its extra -ordinary jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code. The petitioner is putting his best efforts to escape his liability to pay maintenance to his wife and minor child. It appears that the petitioner has enough money to spend on litigation and to engage counsel for initiating proceedings in different Courts on different occasions, but he does not have money to pay to his family.