N.N.Sharma - (1.) THIS is a husband's petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to set aside the order of Magistrate dated 16-9-1981 and the order of revisional court dated 24-7-1982 by which petitioner was held liable for maintenance of opposite party, his wife, to the extent of Rs. 150/- per month, from 16-9-1981, in Case No. 18 of 1979, under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure by Illrd Special Judicial Magistrate, Budaun vide Annexure-2.
(2.) THIS order was affirmed in Criminal Revision no. 221 of 1981 by learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun on 24-7-1982 vide Annexure-4. Admittedly, parties are husband and wife who were married eight years prior to the date of presentation of the application by wife on 4-3-1978. It was alleged by the wife in her application that her husband is a drunkard and gambler and treated her with cruelty. He turned out the opposite party from his house and he abandoned her after fleecing her ornaments etc. However, in order to avoid the second marriage of petitioner with another lady, on intervention of some persons, a compromise was filed in Case No. 17 of 1974, Vimla Devi v. Ramesh Babu in the court of SDM Gunnaur, district Budaun for recovery of maintenance. It was given out in that compromise dated 10-6-1974 that onwards, the husband would not ill-treat the wife. On that assurance, the wife again went to the house of husband who again began to beat her and to associate with gamblers and drunkards and ultimately married one Smt. Somwati, daughter of Ramesh, resident of Ismapur, Police station Gunnaur and turned out the wife who had to take shelter under the roof of her father who is a man of scanty means, poor health and has to maintain the wife along with seven other members of the family with income of Rs. 4000/- per year. The husband is in affluent means with annual income of Rs. 10,000/- and thus sought maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month. The case of petitioner-husband was that he never beat his wife; he purchased some property in her name which was disposed of by her; he denied the allegation of second marriage and expressed his willingness to take the wife to his house and thus prayed for dismissal of the application.
(3.) IN support of her allegations, Smt. Vimla Devi examined herself as PW 1, Rakshpal Singh, her father as PW 2, Surendra Singh her maternal uncle, as PW 3 and Manohar Singh as PW 4, Husband examined himself as DW 1 and Bahadur as DW 2.;