JUDGMENT - WAHANE B.U., J.:---In the instant applicant, the substantial question of law, in the public interest, has been raised and requires decision from this Court. The substantial question of law raised is as under:

"Whether a Judicial Magistrate, First Class trying an application under section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code, is obliged under law, to stay the proceedings, on the ground that a Civil Court of competent jurisdiction has seized the matter in a suit, in which identical pleadings are made, and same reliefs are claimed by one and the same applicant/plaintiff, in whose favour the Magistrate has already awarded interim maintenance?"

2. The facts giving rise to the above question of law, in nutshell, are as under:

The applicant and the non-applicant are the legally married spouses. Their marriage was solemnised as per the customs and rites of Hindu Religion, sometimes in the year 1969 at Buldana. Out of the wedlock, they have two issues viz., first issue is a son Sagar who is living with the applicant while the second issue a daughter Miss Anjali is living with the non-applicant No. 1 Mrs. Shaila Karmarkar. The couple had been to Canada and U.S.A. where they stayed for 12 to 13 years along with their children. Both returned sometime in the year 1984 to India and stayed at Buldana till 1986. During this period, their relations became strained and ultimately on 19-5-1986, the non-applicant filed an application under section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code against the applicant for maintenance for her and the daughter. Along with the application for maintenance, the wife had also filed an application for interim maintenance Rs. 500/- p.m. for both the non-applicants, on the very day. The learned trial Court, after hearing the parties and considering the facts, awarded Rs. 250/- p.m. to the wife and Rs. 150/- p.m. to the daughter, as interim relief. Since the day of the order, the applicant has paid Rs. 24,000/- to the non-applicant as maintenance allowance and that too in advance. Mr. Vidwans, the learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has made the payment in advance till October 1991.

3. On 15th or 16th of October, 1986, the non-applicant No. 1 if filed a Regular Civil Suit No. 227/86 for permanent alimony and also for arrears of maintenance. Along with the plaint, an application for the attachment of the property before Judgment was also filed. On 28-4-1989, the Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Buldana passed the following order on the said application :

"Perused the application and say at Exh. 64. The prayer of the applicant is that order of attachment before Judgment be passed or direct the defendants to furnish solvent surety of Rs. One lakh. By way of Exh. 64, the defendants showed their willingness to furnish surety of one lakh. Hence, the defendants are directed to furnish solvent surety of Rs. One lakh."

In compliance with the above orders, on behalf of the defendants, Shri W.Y. Godbole, resident of Nagpur has furnished the solvent surety before the Joint Civil Judge, Jr. Dn., Buldana. On 20-3-1991, the applicant has filed his written statement in the said Civil Suit, denying the claim of the non-applicants. The case is now posted for filing the documents.

4. The applicant filed an application to stay the proceedings of Misc. Criminal Case No. 114/86 before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Buldana, till the decision of the Regular Civil Suit No. 227/86. The application was opposed. After hearing the parties, the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Buldana, rejected the application filed by the applicant for stay of the Misc. Criminal Case No. 114/86 vide his order dated 24-1-1991.

5. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Buldana in Misc. Criminal Case No. 114/86 dated 24-1-1991, the applicant approached this Court.

6. Mr. Vidwans, the learned Counsel for the applicant submitted that though the non-applicant-wife instituted two proceedings, o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document