AGYA RAM Vs. PUSHPA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner Agya R m is the husband of respondent No. 1 Pushpa Devi and the father of two minors who are respondents Nos. 2 and 3. la proceedings under section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, the respondents obtained an order of maintenance from the Court of Judicial Magistrate Kulu on 19 -1 -1973. By this order the teamed Magistrate granted maintenance of Rs 125 to the first respondent, the wife of the petitioner and at the rate of Rs. 50/ - per month to each of the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 from the date on which the maintenance application was filed, that is from 11 -9 -1970.

(2.) The petitioner failed in providing maintenance as ordered by the Court with the result that on 10 4 -1974 the respondents applied for the enforcement of the maintenance order as contemplated by sub -section (3) of section 488 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure. It appears from the enforcement proceedings undertaking before the learned Magistrate that first a warrant for the attachment and sale of movable properties belonging to the petitioner was issued, but that warrant was received back on 3 -12 -1974 unexecuted as no property of the petitioner was found. Thereafter proceedings for the attachment of immovable property of the petitioner were undertaken and it appears from the record of the case that the petitioners share in the immovable property was attached. The land thus attached is admeasuring 8 bighas and 12 biswas. The remaining property could not be attached because the petitioners l/4th share therein was found to have been gifted away by him to his son. However, it was stated at the bar by learned Advocates of both the perries that the attachment of 8 bighas and 12 biswas of land still continues.

(3.) The learned Advocate of the parties conceded that the warrant of attachment of the above referred immovable property has still remained unexecuted. In the meanwhile, however, the learned Magistrate seems to have issued a warrant against the person of the petitioner and has ordered him to suffer R. I. for three years and six months for non -payment of the arrears of maintenance for that period. This order has been passed by the learned Magistrate on 29 -5 -1976 and being aggrieved by that order the petitioner has filed the present petition.