VARINDER KUMAR Vs. PARSINI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PARSINI Devi respondent is the wife of Raghbar Dayal respondent. Parsini Devi initiated proceedings under section 125, Criminal Procedure Code against Raghbar Dayal and the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, fixed her maintenance at Rs. 150/- per month vide order dated June 9, 1981. Raghbar Dayal did rot pay the maintenance allowed by the Court with the result that Parsini Devi started proceedings for the recovery or Rs. 11600/- by way of arrears. In the recovery proceedings, Raghbar Dayal was arrested and produced before Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Barnala, on April 30, 1983, on which date the following order was passed:

(2.) RAGHBAR Dayal did not deposit Rs. 13000/- in Court on May 24, 1983, though it appears that he had put in appearance in the Court on that date. The learned Magistrate vide order dated December 20, 1983, directed that the amount be recovered from Varinder Kumar by attachment of his property. The petitioner filed revision against the order of the learned Magistrate which was dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge, Barnala, vide order dated January 7, 1984 The petitioner has assailed the orders dated December 20, 1983 and January 7, 1984, in the present petition under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code.

(3.) THE learned counsel for Parsini Devi has argued that the Judicial Magistrate, Barnala, vide order dated April 30, 1983, had directed the release of Raghbar Dayal if he produced surety. who would be responsible for the payment of the amount in case the same was not deposited by him (Raghbar Dayal. The petitioner hoodwinked the Court by not giving surety in terms of the order He should, therefore, be made liable for the payment of Rs. 13000/- The contention of the learned counsel is without merit.