G. RADHAKRISHNA RAO, J.

( 1 ) WIFE and son of the petitioner - herein filed M. C. No. 2/88 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate Bichkunda for maintenance under S. 125, Cr. P. C. that was contested by the husband - petitioner herein on the ground that the wife, Ist respondent - herein is not entitled to maintenance as she is his second wife and his first wife is living. So far as the son is concerned Rs. 100. 00 was granted as maintenance and the claim is so far as the Ist respondent - wife is concerned, it was rejected. The maintenance to son, i. e. , the 2nd respondent was granted on the ground that even under S. 125, Cr. P. C. an illegitimate son or child is entitled to claim maintenance. Against that, they preferred a revision to the Sessions Court in Crl. R. P. No. 3 of 1990 and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Nizamabad granted Rs. 200. 00 to the Ist respondent and Rs. 150. 00 to the 2nd respondent. Aggrieved by that order, the husband - petitioner herein filed this revision.

( 2 ) B. PRAKASARAO, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the grant of maintenance to the Ist respondent - herein is contrary to law inasmuch as, the petitioner is having his first

Click Here to Read the rest of this document