- (1.) The second respondent filed an application under section 125, Cr. P.C. for grant of maintenance against the petitioner. The application was registered as Case No. 30 of 2006. The proceedings were contested by the petitioner before the learned Magistrate on the ground that there was a divorce between the parties on 1 July, 2004; that the second respondent is refusing to live with the petitioner for no justifiable cause; that she is well-educated and thus able to maintain herself; that the petitioner is earning meagre income and thus the application for grant of maintenance @ Rs. 5000/- per month is liable to be rejected.
(2.) The learned Magistrate allowed the application by an order dated 17 June, 2011 and directed the petitioner to pay maintenance to the second respondent @ Rs. 2500/- per month, since the date of the application. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Criminal Revision No. 349 of 2011, which has been dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 24 April, 2015. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has invoked the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner initiated proceedings for restitution of conjugal rights but the second respondent is not ready to live with the petitioner and, as such, there was no justification to award maintenance in her favour. It is further submitted that the petitioner is running a small clinic in a rented accommodation and has got meagre income. Consequently, award of maintenance @ Rs. 2500/- per month and that too from the date of application, without assigning any special reason, is wholly illegal.;