G. M. LODHA, J. - (1.) THIS is a husband's application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. against the order of interim maintenance granted by the Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate No. 2 (North) Kota, Rs. 150/- as interim maintenance u/s 25 Cr, P. C. has been allowed to Smt. Krishna Kumari wife of Raghubir Singh.
(2.) MR. Mehrish learned counsel for the husband applicant has vehemently argued that in the application for divorce which was given allegedly jointly, Smt. Krishna Kumari has mentioned that husband and wife are living separately as per understanding and they have also distributed the assets. The lower courts have taken notice of this argument and mentioned that by the order dated 22nd October, 1983 it is obvious that the application was dismissed and there was no divorce. It is important to mention that the non-applicant Krishna Kumari has mentioned that the husband has contracted second marriage and the husband has not denied it specifically. A perusal of the reply shows that there is a vague denial, which is no denial in the eye of law under order 6 read with Rule 8 C. P. C. The applicant Raghuveer Singh who was present in the court was unable to mention before the court when asked whether the joint application of divorce is still continuing or dismissed. He has stated that he has got no know-ledge, whether it is pending or it has been dismissed. It is obvious that the applicant is wholly negligent not only in maintaining his wife but also regarding all the proceedings connected therewith. The fact that he is giving superficial reply to this court even after about 3 years of dismissal of the joint application goes to show that either he knew nothing regarding proceedings seriously or he is aware of the dismissal and yet he wants to conceal this fact. I am therefore, of the view that in such a matter the grant of interim maintenance is not only within jurisdiction of the Magistrate but it was his legal duty to provide maintenance and not to keep wife high and dry. All the objections which Mr. Mehrish wants to take can be taken and adjudicated upon by the Magistrate while deciding case finally. The present one is an order of interim maintenance and since the joint divorce petition was dismissed in 1983 and admittedly the wife is living separately and the husband is not providing any maintenance therefore, there is a presumption to neglect on his part.
(3.) SECTION 125 Cr. P. C. has been enacted by the legislature to provide protection for wife, children and parents who are neglected or whose maintenance is resued. Interference by this court under SECTION 482 Cr. P. C. itself would not only prevent abuse of process of court but itself would be an abuse of process of court as it would deprive the spouse and the child of her bread which the husband has been denying so far. Consequently I am of the opinion that the grant of interim maintenance was wholly justified and no interference is required. Mr. Mehrish made a reference to the decision of this court in Rashidan Vs. Gafoor (1) and the judgment of Punjab and Haryana High Court in Puran Chand Vs. Smt. Palo (2 ). ;