P.Dayal - (1.) MAZHAR Abbas filed this revision against Smt. Sakeena challenging the order dated 7-6-82, passed by Sri Narendra Bahadur Singh, Munsif Magistrate, Akbarpur, district Faizabad, rejecting his objections.
(2.) THE parties were married to each other. THE opposite party Smt.Sakeena moved an application for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC which was allowed on 1-12-81 and her maintenance allowance was fixed at Rs. 150/- per month by the Magistrate against the revisionist. THE maintenance allowance was payable with effect from 25-4-80. THE husband Mazhar Abbas filed a crimmal revision no. 2 of 1982 which was dismissed. Opposite party Smt.Sakeena moved an application under Section 128 CrPC with a prayer for realisation of Rs. 3200/- which had become due. The revisionist Mazhar Abbas filed objections which were dismissed and the Magistrate passed an order, realisation of the amount of Rs. 3200/- by deducting a sum of Rs. 200/- p. m. from the salary of the revisionist. The revisionist claimed in this revision that he was employed at Lucknow in the vigilance section of the Police Department and that the courts at Lucknow had jurisdiction under Section 128 CrPC to realise the amount of maintenance from him. He raised second point to the effect that he had offered to maintain Smt. Sakeena in his objections and the learned Magistrate ought to have decided this point. Thirdly, he claimed that the arrears of the amount of maintenance allowance could not be realised from his salary.
(3.) THE revisionist relied on the provisions of Section 128, CrPC which read as follows :- " 128. A copy of the order of maintenance shall be given without payment to the person in whose favour it is made, or to his guardian, if any, or to person to whom the allowance is to be paid and such order may be enforced by any Magistrate in any place where the person against whom it is made may be, on such Magistrate being, satisfied as to the identity of the parties and the non-payment of the allowance due. " It is evident from the wordings of the aforesaid section 128 that this section (Section 128) lays down the provisions for enforcing the order which was passed under Section 125 CrPC. It has been clearly laid down that such an order may be enforced by any Magistrate in any place where the person against whom it is made, may be, on such Magistrate being satisfied as to the identity of the parties and the non-payment of the allowance due. This provision has been specifically introduced by the legislature for meeting the situation where a person against whom an order is passed lives out side the jurisdiction of that Magistrate who had passed the order, as is the case in the present proceedings. THE revisionist started living at Lucknow. THErefore, the order can be enforced at Lucknow only subject to the condition that the Magistrate in Lucknow has to satisfy himself about the identity of the parties and the non-payment of the allowance due. THE forum for enforcing the order passed under Section 125 CrPC, as laid down in Section 128, is the Magistrate where the person against whom that order was made, resides. Sub-section (3) of Section 125 CrPC lays down that if any person so ordered fails without sufficient cause to comply with the order, any such Magistrate may, for every breach of the order, issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for levying fines, and may sentence such person, for the whole or any part of each months allowance remaining unpaid after the execution of the warrant, to imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until payment if sooner made : Provided that no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due under this section unless application be made to the court to levy such amount within a period of one year from the date on which it became due :;