ASIT KUMAR BISI, J.

( 1 ) THE present revision application under sections 397/401/482 of the code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the present petitioner Anwor Ali haider is directed against the order dated 15th April, 2004 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly (Sadar) in M. C. Case no. 13 of 2002. By the order impugned the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial magistrate allowed the application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal procedure filed by Sakina Bibi presently O. P. No. 1 and awarded allowance for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 750 per month in her favour and rs. 750/- per month for her daughter Rima Haider with effect from the date of the said order.

( 2 ) THE facts anterior to filing of the instant revision application may be narrated thus.

( 3 ) SAKINA Bibi presently O. P. No. 1 filed a case for maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which was registered as m. C. No. 104 of 1985 and by the order passed on 26th December, 1985 the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate awarded allowance for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month in her favour and Rs. 100/- per month for her daughter.

( 4 ) SUBSEQUENTLY, Sakina Bibi has filed the application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure alleging that she having no source of income has been facing much difficulty to maintain herself and her daughter with the paltry amount awarded on 26th December, 1985 owing to high price of essential commodities. According to her case her husband anwor Ali Haider presently the petitioner has agricultural land measuring 30 bighas and he owns a mini deep tubewell and a tractor and deals in cattle. It has been alleged by her that her husband earns Rs. 15. 000/- per month from these sources. She has prayed for enhancement of maintenance allowance payable by her husband to her and her daughter at the rate of rs. 1,500/- per month each.

( 5 ) THE said application under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal procedure has been contested by the present petitioner figuring as opposite party in the said proceeding before the learned Court below. In his written objection he has denied all the material allegations levelled against him. His specific case is that he divorced present O. P. No. 1 Sakina Bibi by pronouncing three talaqs as per Mohammedan Law and Shariat long ago on 28th February, 1990 and he is no longer under obligation to pay allowance for maintenance to Sakina Bibi under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal procedure and as such the question of enhancement of allowance for maintenance does not arise. His further case is that the daughter of Sakina bibi has attained majority and as such she is not entitled to get maintenance. As alleged by him, Sakina and her daughter are expert on embroidery work and each of them earns Rs. 3. 000/- per month. It has been further alleged by him that he along with his wife and children lives in his father's house and all of them are depending on income of his father.

( 6 ) THE learned Court below has refused to accept the plea of divorce taken by the present petitioner who is opposite party in the maintenance proceeding. On scrutiny of the evidence on record the learned Court below has found that the talaq alleged to have been given by Anwor Ali Haider (present petitioner) to Sakina Bibi (present O. P. No. 1) was not pronounced in presence of O. P. No. 1 and there is no iota of evidence on record which goes to suggest that the said talaq was communicated to Sakina Bibi. The learned Court below has further held that even if Sakina Bibi is the divorced wife of Anwor Ali Haider she is still entitled to claim maintenance. So far as the monthly maintenance payable to the daughter is concerned it is the specific finding of the learned Court below that since the daughter is not married she is entitled to get maintenance from her father till she gets married.

( 7 ) IN view of change of circumstances due to steep rise in price of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document