- (1.) This is an unfortunate case where the High Court has quashed an order of maintenance passed in favour of a minor child Tarana Farooq by the Special Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Rampur under Section 125, Cr. P.C., in exercise of its powers under S. 482, Cr. P.C. The High Court has, however, deemed it fit to grant a certificate to the appellant Dukhtar Jahan, the mother of the minor child, under Article 134(1)(c) read with Article 134A of the Constitution to prefer an appeal to this Court for consideration of a question of law formulated as under :- "Whether, in an application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the High Court can interfere with concurrent findings rendered by the Courts below".
(2.) As we find the appeal is capable of being disposed of on the basis of other materials, we do not feel called upon to answer the question of law formulated for consideration by the High Court.
(3.) We may now have a look at the facts of the case. The appellant Dukhtar Jahan and the respondent Mohammed Farooq who were already related as first cousins, being the issues of two sisters, were married on 11-5-1973. The marriage lasted only for about 17 months since the respondent divorced the appellant on 16-10-1974. However, when the parties were in wedlock the appellant delivered a female child named Tarana Farooq on 5-12-1973. After the respondent effected the divorce in October 1974, the appellant filed a petition under Section 125, Cr. P.C. in the Court of the Special Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Rampur for grant of maintenance to her and the child at Rs. 150 p.m. and Rs. 50 p.m. respectively. The appellant however gave up the claim of maintenance for herself as the stand of the respondent was that he had paid her the Maher and the amount payable for the Iddat period and that he had also returned all the articles given by way of dowry. The enquiry in the petition was, therefore, confined to the claim of maintenance for the child Tarana.;