CHANDRA BAHADUR TAMANG Vs. SUNDERMAYA TAMANG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revisional application by the petitioner against the order passed against him by the learned Sessions Judge directing him to make monthly allowances for the maintenance of his wife, the respondent No, 1, and his son, the respondent No. 2, on an application filed by them under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, that being the Code which is still applicable in Sikkim subject to some exceptions and modifications.

(2.) THE impugned order having been passed on 25-2-81 and the present revisional application having been filed on 8-9-81, the first question that arises for consideration is whether the present revision is barred by time. The Law of Limitation in force in Sikkim, like the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 (now repealed and replaced by the Limitation Act of 1063), does not prescribe any period of limitation for any revisional application, civil or criminal. But in Kinzang Dahdul V. Ransul Kharga 1978 Cri LJ 1569 at pp. 1572-1573 it has been observed by this Court as hereunder:

(3.) THIS decision in Kinzang Dahdul (supra) has been consistently followed by this Court in O. P. Singh v. State 1978 Cri LJ 1650, in Jasman Rai v. Sonamaya Rai 1980 Cri LJ 500 and in other cases. The period prescribed for all appeals to the High Court under the Law of Limitation in force in Sikkim being 60 days, if such period is reckoned from the date of the impugned order, the application must be regarded to have been filed long after the period within which it was to be filed according to the ratio of the aforesaid decisions.