T.P.GARG, J. - (1.) SMT Neelam wife of Dinesh Kumar Agarwal and her minor daughter have filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer to stay the operation of the order dated 7-3-1995, passed by the VII Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr, respondent No. 1, in Criminal Revision No. 88 of 1994 and also the order, dated 1-2-1993, passed by the IVth Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buland­shahr, respondent No. 2, in Misc. Case No. 1031 of 1993. Dinesh Kumar Agarwai v. Smt. Neelam, under Section 126, Cr. P. C. and also to direct Dinesh Kumar Agarwal, respondent No. 3 to pay the allowance to them in pursuance to the order dated 26-10-1991.
(2.) BRIEFLY , the facts of the case are as under : Smt. Neelam, petitioner No. 1, was married with Dinesh Kumar Agarwal, respondent No. 3, on 9-2-1989 at Bulandshahr. Some times in the years 1990 a daughter, Km. Isha alias Quriya, petitioner No. 2, was born to her from out of their wedlock. It is alleged that respondent No. 3 and members of his family started maltreat eating petitioner No. 1 ever since her marriage in order to get their demand of more and dower satisfied. When she arid her father failed to satisfy and fulfil the demand of respondent No. 3, she was turned out from his house by respondent No. 3 on 20-9-1990 along-with her daughter. On 26-9-1990, a notice was sent to respondent No. 3, but the same was not accepted. Another notice dated 4-5-1991 was served upon respondent No. 3 asking him to settle the dispute outside the court, but to no effect. Finding no other alternative, she filed an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. on 11-7-1991 praying for the grant of maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 500 to each of them (both petitioners No. 1 and 2). It is alleged that despite personal service of notice issued by the court, respondent No. 3 did not appear before the trial Court and was, therefore, proceeded against ex pane, vide order dated 4-10-1991 passed by respondent No. 2. Subsequent­ly, on 26-10-1991, respondent No. 2, vide order (Annexure '2' to the petition), passed an ex parte order whereby maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 300 per month to petitioner No. 1 and Rs. 200 per month to petitioner No. 2 was allowed. Since respondent No. 3 did not pay the amount of maintenance, so awarded, the petitioners filed an execution petition for realisa­tion of the amount of maintenance from respondent No. 3, vide Misc. Case Nos. 557 of 1993, 731 of 1993 and 735 of 1993. In spite of service of notices, respondent No. 3 did not put in appearance and accordingly, a order of attachment as well as warrant of respondent No. 3 were issued on 23-8-1993. When all the aforesaid legal actions were initiated against him, respondent No. 3 moved an application under Section 126, Cr. P. C. with a prayer to set aside the ex parte order of maintenance dated 26-10-1991 (Annexure '4' to the petition). The application filed by respondent No. 3 was allowed by respondent No. 2, against which a Revision No. 88 of 1994 was filed by the petitioners. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, respondent No. 1, vide his order dated 7-3-1995 (Annexure '6' to the petition), dismissed the revision and maintained the order passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, respondent No. 2 and directed that the case be decided on merits.
(3.) FEELING aggrieved by both the aforesaid orders, the petitioners (Smt. Neelam and Km. Isha) filed the present petition in this Court.;