MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA, J. - (1.) BY filing instant criminal revision the petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 19.05.2008. passed by the Judge, Family Court, Kota in criminal case No. 860/2002, by which he directed the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 2000/- p.m. as maintenance amount.
(2.) I have heard counsel for the respective parties and carefully scanned the entire material. Without going into the merits of the case, both the counsel appearing for the respective parties jointly prayed that the Family Court, Kota be directed to decide the matter, after taking into consideration the judgments which they are citing before this Court.
(3.) MANISH Kumawat, counsel appearing for the petitioner has placed reliance upon a Judgment delivered in the case of Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat and others, reported in 2005(2) RCR(Criminal) 190 : 2005(2) RCR(Civil) 151 : 2005(1) Apex Criminal 596 : AIR 2005 SC 1809. The head-note A and B of which are reproduced as under : "(A) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974), Section 125- Maintenance- 'Wife'-Scope - Cannot be enlarged to include woman not lawfully married- Plight of woman unlawfully entering into wedlock with married man - Can only be undone by Legislature- Principle of estoppel cannot be pressed to defeat Section 125. (B) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) Section 125- Maintenance -Entitlement-Cannot but be decided by reference to personal law of parties." ;