JUDGMENT - N.P. CHAPALGAONKER, J.:---Mehtabbi and her minor daughter aged 5 filed an application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against her husband Sk. Mohammad. When a notice was served on the respondent, the respondent husband filed a say contending therin that he has divorced applicant Mehtabbi on 23.12.1988 and, therefore, the application is not maintainable in view of the provisions of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 (for short, Act of 1986).

2. In view of say of respondent, learned Magistrate did not feel it necessary to record the evidence and dismissed the application for maintenance vide his Order dated 17.7.1989. Criminal Revision No. 217 of 1990 filed by the petitioner challenging aforesaid order was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad by his Order dated 5.6.1990. This writ petition challenges these orders.

3. Though it is true that the powers under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure will have to be exercised reading them alongwith the provisions of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, the proposition that whenever a divorce is pleaded by the husba

Click Here to Read the rest of this document