RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for O.P. No. 2 and also perused the lower court record.
(2.) IN this application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 31.07.2000, passed by Shri S.K. Dubey, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Sahibganj, in Cr. Misc. Case No. 18 of 1993, by which an order was passed directing the petitioner to pay Rs.400/ - per month to the opposite party no. 2 and Rs.200/ - per month to her minor child and also the order dated 10.5.2001, passed in Cr. Revision No. 83 of 2001 by the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj, by which the order of the learned Magistrate granting maintenance was affirmed.
(3.) A proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. was initiated on the basis of a complaint filed by the opposite party no. 2 and after perusing the show cause, an order was passed on 31.7.2000 in Cr. Misc. Case No. 18 of 1993, by which the petitioner was directed to make payment of Rs.400/ -per month as maintenance to the wife and Rs.200/ - per month to the minor child. The order dated 31.7.2000 was subsequently challenged in revision and the learned Sessions Judge, Sahibganj by order dated 10.05.2001, passed in Cr. Revision No. 83 of 2001 was pleased to dismiss the said revision application. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned orders by submitting that the opposite party no. 2 is not the petitioner's legally married wife and he is not the biological father of the male child born to the opposite party no. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the learned courts below had overtly relied upon the witnesses of the opposite party no. 2 and if the paternity itself was disputed, option was available to the learned courts below by directing the parties to undergo a DNA Test.;