( 1 ) THIS petition arises out of proceedings taken under S. 488 Cr. P. C. The 1st petitioner before this Court claims to be the wife of the respondent and the petitioners 2 and 3 are said to be her minor children born to the respondent. The 1st petitioner claimed a total sum of Rs. 150 per month towards maintenance of herself and her 3 minor children. After the enquiry the learned Magistrate dismissed the petition. The petitioners challenge the correctness of the said order passed by the learned Magistrate in this revision petition.

( 2 ) SRI Riazuddin, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has contended that the learned Magistrate, after having accepted the evidence let in by the petitioners, was wrong in dismissing the petition. He has pointed out that the learned Magistrate has also rejected the evidence let in on behalf of the respondent, but yet strangely dismissed the petition. The learned Magistrate has also given a finding that it had been established in evidence that petitioner 1 was the kept mistress of the respondent. It has been argued that the standard of proof of marriage under S. 488 Cr. P. C. is different from that laid down either in the Divorce

Click Here to Read the rest of this document