AKHTARUNNISA Vs. NASEEB KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision at the instance of the wife and her minor son against her husband is directed against the order dated 13-3-1987 of the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Bilaspur rejecting their claim for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The trial Magistrate by order dated 2-1-1985 had granted a sum of Rs. 150/- per month to the wife and Rs. 50/- per month to the minor son as maintenance to be paid by the husband. The Sessions Court in revision at the instance of the husband set aside the order of the Magistrate on the ground that the evidence disclosed that the wife herself left the house of the husband and refused to live with him because he was living in a small accommodation jointly with his sister and brother-in-law. The Sessions Judge, therefore, formed an opinion that there was no refusal or neglect to maintain on the part of the husband.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the applicants, first made an attempt to assail the findings and conclusions reached by the revisional Court against the wife. Learned counsel then submitted that in any case there was no justification for the Sessions Court to set aside the order of the maintenance granted to the minor son.

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the non-applicant made an attempt to support the whole order of the Sessions Judge. He, however, could not support the order of the Sessions Court in so far as it set aside the order awarding maintenance to the minor son. If the minor son was living away from the husband, it was his duty as a father to have made provision for his maintenance.