S.N.SAXENA,J. - (1.) THIS revision application is directed against the order and judgment dated 20.7.1992 passed by Sri Y.S. Raizada Judge, Family Court, Bareilly in Criminal Misc. Case No. 1027 of 1991 Smt. Meena Devi v. Harpal under Section 125; Cr. P.C. whereby he allowed the application an Mixed a sum of rupees 300/ - per month as the amount of maintenance to be paid by the revisionist to her every month w.e.f. the date of the filling of her application dated 27.6.1991. Feeling aggrieved the husband preferred third revision application.
(2.) IT was admitted case of both the parties that the revisionist was married with O.P. No.1 Smt. Meena Devi in a legal and valid manner and had lived peacefully, thereafter, for some time as husband and wife. The relations thereafter had become strained as the revisionist used to make demand for more and more dowry. On such demand was for rupees 20,000/ - from her father to her husband but it was not fulfilled as a result of which the revisionist had started treating her in a very cruel manner and ultimately had turned her out of his house. She also had filed a First Information Report on 30.6.1990 when she had been turned out at P.S. Keela in town, Bareilly. Her husband, thereafter did not bother to take Care of her and sometime later had remarried Smt. Kiran Devi in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act. Her husband had got income of about Rs. 3,000/ - per month which included rental income as well as agricultural income of his share. The wife being illiterate was not in a position to maintain herself. Finding no other remedy she had moved the application under section 125, Cr. P.C. The husband had contested the claim of his wife and denied all the allegations except factum of his marriage. He also showed that he had got very meagre income and the amount of maintenance claimed by his wife from his was too excessive. She herself was in a position to maintain her by earning money by from stitching, knitting and manual labour.
(3.) BOTH the parties adduced evidence in support of their contentions .the wife examined herself as P.W. 1 and Shyam Lal as P.W. 2. The husband examined himself and a lady Smt. Chandrawati as P.W. 1 and P.W. 2. The wife had filed a Photostat copy of the proposal which her husband and Smt. Kiran Devi had filed on 23.6.1990 before the Marriage Officer for their marriage in accordance with the provisions of the Special Marriage Act as well as the First Information Report lodged by Sri Vodram, who was the husband of Smt. Kiran Devi against her husband under Section 498, I.P.C. on 28.7.1 990. The documents from the revenue record were also filed by her 10 show that her husband had got agricultural land. She also filed extract from the tax register from the Municipal Corporation for the year 1977 which showed that her father -in -law had got house property income of which was shared by her husband as well.;