ASHIM KUMAR ROY, J. - (1.) In connection with a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Alipore being Criminal Misc. Case No.72 of 2010, the evidence of the opposite party No.2/wife was closed before her cross -examination by the petitioner. Aggrieved by such order, this criminal revision has been brought.
(2.) Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. Considered their respective submissions and perused the materials on record.
(3.) A proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a quasi -criminal proceedings and according to sub -section 2 of section 126 CrPC recording of evidence is mandatory to reach to a decision as to the question of granting or not granting maintenance. It appears from the record that after the examination of the opposite party/wife was over in the context of submissions of the parties on March 1, 2014 the matter was referred for mediation and June 19, 2014 was fixed for the report. However, on June 19, 2014 the petitioner was neither present nor was represented by his lawyer although the opposite party/wife was present and duly represented. On that day the court below closed the evidence of the opposite party/wife before her cross -examination. Admittedly, June 19, 2014 was fixed for report and not for cross -examination of the opposite party/wife, therefore, the learned court below was not right and at all justified to close her evidence on that day denying the opportunity of her cross -examination to the petitioner/husband.;