- (1.) The Magistrate awarded maintenance to the wife u/S. 125 of the Criminal P.C. to be paid by the husband at the rate of Rs. 100.00 per month. The husband did not make payment and the Court committed the husband to jail for 14 months as maintenance for 14 months was due. Against that order the husband filed a revision, that was dismissed. But that did not satisfy the husband and instead of paying maintenance to the wife he again spent in litigation and filed this application u/S.482, Cr. P.C. for review or recall of the order dismissing the revision alleging that "a very obnoxious interpretation has been made" by this Court and the order dismissing the revision was "utterly smarting under the abuse of judicial process".
(2.) In the case of State of Orissa v. Ram Chander Agarwala, AIR 1979 SC 87 the Supreme Court said that once a judgment has been pronounced by a High Court either in exercise of its appellate or its revisional jurisdiction, no review or revision can be entertained. In the application for review some rulings are cited, but they have not been referred at the time of argument. However, I proceed to consider this review application on merits assuming only for the purpose of this case that review is maintainable.
(3.) The first argument is that imprisonment for more than one month cannot be awarded even if maintenance may have been due for more than one month. For this purpose the language of S. 125(3), Cr. P.C. is to be seen and the principle of interpretation is that so far as possible every word used by the legislature has to be given meaning and not to be treated surplus without clear justification.;