N.K. Gupta, J. - (1.)THE applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 26.5.2006 passed by the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Khandwa in criminal revision No. 185/2005, whereby the order dated 29.7.2005 passed by JMFC, Khandwa in criminal case No. 33/2003 was reversed and a maintenance of Rs.700/ - per month was granted to the respondent.
(2.)ADMITTED facts of the case are that the marriage of the respondent and the applicant took place on 8.2.2001 at Khandwa. On 29.11.2001, the couple was blessed with a male child.
The respondent has filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the JMFC, Khandwa that the applicant was in habit to demand a sum of Rs.10,000/ -, a colour TV and a golden chain. He was in habit to beat the respondent after consuming liquor. It was alleged that the applicant had beaten the respondent even when she was pregnant. On 30.3.2002, the applicant poured kerosene upon the respondent and tried to set fire upon her. She was taken to the hospital and police station and thereafter, she was taken by her parents. The applicant never tried to bring the respondent back to his house and therefore, since 31.3.2002, the respondent was residing with her parents. She gave a demand notice on 26.11.2002 but, the applicant avoided to take that notice. Hence, the respondent has moved a maintenance application for demanding maintenance of Rs.700/ - and Rs.500/ - per month for herself and her son Rahul respectively.

(3.)THE applicant in his reply has denied about the allegations made by the respondent. He has pleaded that father of the respondent was an old person, who had a flour mill but, due to his old age, he could not run that flour mill. One brother of respondent was residing at Betul in his in -laws' house, whereas one brother of the respondent was earning his income by plying an auto -rickshaw The respondent and her parents have pressurized the applicant to reside with them and to run the flour mill. It was pleaded that the respondent was residing in her parents house on her own wish. Therefore, she was not entitled to get any maintenance.