AJEET KUMAR BEDI Vs. RAJ RANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a criminal revision and has been directed against the judgment dated 1.2.1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hissar, who set aside the order dated 20.8.1994 passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Tohana, who dismissed the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. of Smt. Raj Rani respondent. The learned Sessions Judge, on the contrary, allowed the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. of the wife against her husband and awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from the date of the order of the Trial Court besides Rs. 550/- as costs of the revision and this time petitioner Ajeet Kumar Bedi was not satisfied with the order of the learned Sessions Judge and he has filed the present revision.

(2.) Smt. Raj Rani filed a petition under Section 125, Cr.P.C. for maintenance against her husband Ajeet Kumar Bedi alleging that her marriage with the petitioner was solemnized according to Hindu rites and ceremonies in the month of March, 1974 at Tohana and her father gave sufficient dowry articles at the time of marriage worth Rs. 55,000/-. The petitioner Shri Ajeet Kumar Badi is a man of greedy nature. He is in the habit of taking liquor and under the influence of liquor he used to beat her. He is working as a teacher in a school. The wife alleges that after the death of her mother-in-law her husband along with his father, brother and sister started making a demand of Rs. 5,000/- and a scooter. When she failed to satisfy the demand of her husband, the latter started giving her beating. So much so her husband levelled allegations against her to the effect she was not fit giving birth to a child. The father and brother of the respondent took panchayat to the house of the petitioner for rehabilitation but no effect. Rather the demand was repeated by the petitioner that the respondent should pay Rs. 5,000/- in cash besides a scooter.

(3.) Notice of the application was given to the husband, who con tested the same. He took a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition, on the plea that application under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act was pending between the parties. On merits, it was asserted by the petitioner that the parents of the respondent did not give dowry articles as alleged by her. She has withdrawn from his society without any reasonable cause or excuse. The respondent-wife leaving the matrimonial home had taken all valuable clothes and jewellery. She has independent source of income. According to the respondent, in fact, Anil Kumar son of the sister of the respondent was studying at Nabha. He was residing with the petitioner, who used to bear all the expenses of that boy. The sister of the respondent and her husband were at Nabha. They compelled the parties to this petition that they would get their son admitted in 10+2 class at Nabha. The petitioner refused to keep Anil Kumar at Nabha. On 18.5.1987 when the petitioner was away to his school, the sister of the respondent in the company of her husband took her to Tohana. With the above defence the petitioner Shri Ajeet Kumar Bedi had prayed before the Trial Court for the dismissal of the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C.