PARVEZ AHMED Vs. SAFEENA BI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner (non -applicant) has assailed the correctness of the order dated 22.12.2003 propounded by the learned Sessions Judge, Poonch, by virtue of which the revision preferred by him against the order of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Poonch, dated 24.7.2003 has been dismissed.

(2.) FACTS relevant for the disposal of this revision may tersely be noticed; Respondent (applicant) Safeena Bi (minor) through her mother has initiated an application, seeking maintenance allowance under section 488 Cr. P.C. against her father in alleging therein that she was born out of the illicit sexual relationship between her mother and the petitioner (non -applicant). It is stated that her mother and the petitioner (non -applicant) were studying together in the School and it was at the time the non -applicant promised to marry with her mother and developed illicit sexual relations with her mother as a result of which she was born on 28.4.2003. The petitioner (non -applicant) has now refused to marry with her mother and also neglected and refused to maintain the respondent, applicant (minor) the illegitimate child born out of illicit relationship, having sufficient means which compelled the respondent (applicant) to approach the Court through her mother and claim maintenance of Rs. 2,000/ - per month as the mother with whom she is residing is unable to maintain her on account of financial constraints. An application simultaneously was also preferred by the respondent (applicant) for an interim maintenance on the grounds explicitly delineated in the main petition, claiming maintenance allowance from the petitioner (non -applicant). The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Poonch having found on the basis of an affidavit, a prima facie case to the grant of prayer for interim maintenance from the petitioner (non -applicant), the natural father possessing agricultural land and he having sufficient means but neglected and refused to maintain the applicant -respondent, awarded a monthly allowance of Rs. 800/ - till final disposal of the petition, vide his order dated 24.7.2003. This order was challenged in revision before the learned Sessions Judge, Poonch by the non -applicant, petitioner (father), but without any success and his revision petition stood dismissed by the impugned order dated 22.12.2003 of the learned Session Judge, Poonch which became the subject matter of this revision.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties in extenso and gone through the relevant provisions of law touching the matter in controversy.