MOHD RASHID Vs. JAHANGIR AHMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS motion of revision is aimed at revising the order of learned Session Judge. Poonch dated 9 -7 -2001, whereby he came to dismiss the revision petition titled Mohd. Rashid versus Jahangir Ahmad affirming the order of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Poonch granting maintenance of Rs. 200/ - per month from the date of application in favour of respondent applicant in an application under section 488 Cr. P. C

(2.) IT appear that on 1st of July 1986 respondent applicant Jahangir Ahmad ( minor) under the next friend of his mother Mst. Sharifa Bibi came to approch the Inquiry Magistrate for the grant of maintenance allowance from the petitioner. This petition came to be registered as misc. no. 13 of 1 -7 -1986 and decided on 2 -12 -1986 by virtue of compromise arrived at in between the next friend of minor respondent applicant whereby it was agreed that the petitioner non/applicant shall pay Rs 50/ - as maintenance allowance to the respondent/applicant. After arriving at said compromise it appears that the petitioner never paid said amount of maintenance up to November 1988 to the respondent applicant and thereafter again neglected to maintain him. It also appear that the petitioner started another round of litigation by filing a fresh application for grant of maintenance on the ground that respondent/applicant is bron out of the wedlook of Sharifa and petitioner and Mst . Sharifa who stands divorced by the petitioner/ non -applicant. That prior to this application the respondent applicant had filed an application for grant of maintenance under section 488 Cr. P.C. which ended into compromise wherein the petitioner non -applicant had agreed to pay Rs. 50/ -per month to the respondent/applicant for two years pursuant to that he paid only upto november 1998. That the respondent/applicant is minor and the petitioner/hon -applicant is employed in CRPF and is drawing a monthly salary of Rs. 1500/ -. The petitioner/non -applicant resisted the petition by filing objection where in he has interalia stated that the respondent/applicant is not his son and he is bron from Mst. Sharifa his divorcee during the period when he had no acess with her. After recording the evidence of parties and their witnesses, the Inquiry Magistrate came to award an amount of Rs 200/ - as monthly maintenance to the respondent/applicant from the petitioner non -applicant after holding that the respondent/ applicant is the son of petitioner/ non -applicant who is a person of sufficient means and has neglected to maintain his son.

(3.) AGGRIEVED by this order the petitioner has challenged the same before the learned Sessions Judge, Poonch who by virtue of impugned order has not found any illegality or impropriety in the order and has came to dismiss the same after affirming the order of Inquiry Magistrate heard the learned counsel for parties.