GULAM HUSSAIN Vs. MST. ZATOON BIBI AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this petition under Section 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner inter alia seeks to quash Execution proceeding and impugned orders dated 16.9.2014 ( Munsiff Basoli ) 30.01.2015 ( Pr. Session Judge Kathua) and 08.03.2017 ( Munsiff Basoli ) with a further prayer to direct the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Basohli to hear the matter afresh and pass orders after hearing the petitioner.

(2.) Facts giving rise to filing of this petition briefly stated are that respondent No.1 is the wife of the petitioner and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are their children. It is stated that respondent Nos. 6 to 8 are the children of 1st marriage of respondent No.1 and she (respondent No.1) without any reason or desertion has filed the petition for maintenance at Court below. It is further stated that she is still residing in the matrimonial house of the petitioner and it is the petitioner who has not been allowed to come to home at the age of 67 years. Petitioner many times approached respondent No.1 to allow the petitioner to company her in the matrimonial home, but all in vain. Thereafter, petitioner under Section 488 CrPC was filed before the court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Basohli and in that petition, petitioner was set ex parte. It is further stated that after knowledge of the same, petitioner filed a revision before the learned Pr. Sessions Judge Kathua but same was dismissed. Thereafter, petitioner filed application for setting aside the order before Munisff Basohli but the same application was not considered and the plea of the petitioner was rejected. It is further contended that the petitioner is a respectable and repudiated citizen of the society and the false and frivolous case has been registered against the petitioner.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents by concealing the truth have filed Execution proceedings pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Basohli which is totally based on false facts on two grounds, firstly, as respondent No.1 was never deserted by the petitioner and it is the petitioner who is out of his home and property in an old age and secondly the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Basohli has directed to pay maintenance to respondent No.7 who is the daughter of first marriage of respondent No.1. Learned counsel further stated that the impugned orders are against the natural justice as no opportunity of being heard has been provided to the petitioner.