RADHAKRISHNA RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition filed under S. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the orders passed in Cri. Revision Petition No. 14 of 1987 on the file of the I Additional Sessions Judge, Kurnool.

( 2 ) THE petitioner is the husband the respondent is the wife. The parties are Hindus and the marriage between them took place in the year 1963 at Tirupati according to Hindu religion and custom. Both lived together happily for about a period of three years. During that period they did not beget any children. In December, 1966 she went to her parents house for Sankranti festival and the respondent made no attempt to take her back and from then onwards they started living separately. She got issued a notice on 18-7-1984 to pay a monthly allowance of Rs. 500/ per month but the husband never cared to take the notice and reply to it. Therefore, she filed a petition before the Addl. Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nandikotkur, under S. 125, Cr. P. C. claiming a maintenance of Rs. 300/- per month alleging that her husband wilfully neglected to maintain her. 2a. The husband, who is the petitioner herein, resisted the application on the ground that she deserted him and that she had illicit intimacy prior to and subsequent to the marriage with her sister s husband.

( 3 ) ON a consideration of the entire material on record, the learned Magistrate rejected the contention of the husband and accepted the plea set up by the wife as correct and awarded a maintenance of Rs. 200/- per month taking into consideration the financial status of the husband and the annual income that is being derived by the joint family of the husband from the agricultural land. Aggrieved against the said award of maintenance, the husband preferred a revision petition. But that revision petition was dismissed confirming the finding of the learned Magistrate. Hence this petition by the husband, under S. 482, Cr. P. C.

( 4 ) WHEN a party has already availed of the revisional jurisdiction under Ss. 397 and 399, Cr. P. C. the question of invoking the jurisdiction of this Court again under S. 482, Cr. P. C. is very much in doubt.

( 5 ) IT may be appropriate to mention here that after the order of the learned Magistrate granting maintenance and after filing a revision petition before the Additional Sessions Court, the petitioner herein filed a petition under S. 13 (1) (i) (b) of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce on the ground that his wife deserted him for more than 2 years. But it appears that desertion is about 10 years prior to the filing of the petition for maintenance and 12 years prior to the filing of the petition for divorce. The learned Subordinate Judge who tried the O. P. found that the desertion as pleaded by the husband is not correct and the wife was residing separately on account of the conduct of her husband only and ultimately refused to grant divorce. The husband carried the matter in appeal in C MA No. 954 of 1988 and we have confirmed the order of the learned Subordinate Judge today in a separate order in that C. M. A.

( 6 ) THE main contention that has been raised by the petitioner in this petition is that the respondent-wife is residing separately since a trout 10 or 12 years prior to the filing of the petition far maintenance and therefore, she waived her right by keeping herself silent all these years and due to this long spell of time she disentitles herself from claiming any maintenance.

( 7 ) UNDER Section 125 (1), Cr. P. C. , if the husband having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain his wife who is unable to maintain herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife at such monthly rate not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole.

( 8 ) UNDER Section 125 (4), "no wife shall be entitled to receive an allowance from her husband under this section if she is living in adultery, or if, without any s

Click Here to Read the rest of this document