NAJAM-UD-DIN Vs. MST FARIDA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the medium of instant petition filed under Sec. 561-A Cr. P.C, petitioner seeks quashing of order dtd. 8/10/2012, passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Ramban in Criminal Revision No.03/2012, titled 'Nazir Ahmad Vs. Mst. Famida and anr.', by virtue of which the interim order of maintenance granted on 29/5/2012 by the JMIC 1 st Class, Banihal, has been upheld. Petitioner has challenged the said order on the ground that impugned order is nonspeaking order. He has specifically pleaded in his objections to the petition filed under Sec. 488 Cr.P.C., that petitioner had divorced his wife, so the petition was not maintainable. The trial court without granting opportunity to the petitioner to lead evidence in support of the issue that the respondent No.1 after divorce is no more his wife and merely on the statements of the respondent No. 1's witnesses recorded by the Trial Court, returned the findings that the divorce is not proved and, thus, the Trial Court has committed the gross irregularity in holding that the divorce is not proved without affording opportunity to the petitioner to lead evidence. This important aspect of the case was overlooked by the Principal Sessions Court, Ramban, which has resulted in grave miscarriage of justice to the petitioner. That petitioner has specifically pleaded in the objections that he is earning Rs.200.00per day. On this meager amount, his mother, brother and sister are also dependent upon him; therefore, he cannot make payment to his wife.

(2.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents has argued that this petition is not maintainable because there are two concurrent findings of facts recorded by the Courts below, which cannot be set-aside in this petition.

(3.) I have considered the contention of learned counsel for the respondent.