ARUNABHA BASU, J.

(1) THE application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is filed by the petitioner herein being aggrieved by the order dated 23. 12. 2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 2nd Court, Barrackpore in connection with Criminal Revision No. 109 of 2004 affirming the order dated 19. 2. 2004 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Barrackpore in connection with No. M Case No. 90 of 2003.

(2) THE main contention of the petitioner is that he is married to one smt. Tapati Roy and the said marriage was solemnized according to Hindu rites on 10th May, 1978. Out of said marriage, one son was born in the year 1979 and one daughter was born in the year 1984. The said marriage is still subsisting, opposite party No. 1 is legally married wife of one Badal Kar @ paritosh Kar which is revealed from the voter list of Noapara Assembly constituency. The said opposite party introduced herself as legally married wife of petitioner on the basis of purported Certificate of Marriage and the wife of the petitioner has filed a suit for annulment of marriage with consequential reliefs for cancellation of the Certificate of Marriage in the court of the learned District Judge at Barasat. The said suit was registered as Matrimonial Suit No. 1495 of 2004 and the suit is still pending.

(3) PETITIONER along with his family members obtained ration cards and got their names registered in the electoral roll.

(4) OPPOSITE party No. 1 filed an application claiming maintenance under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the same is registered as m Case No. 90 of 2003. In the said application, opposite party claimed to be legally married wife of the petitioner herein and it is also averred that from the said marriage, a daughter was born.

(5) OPPOSITE party also filed an application claiming an amount of Rs. 1,200/-per month as interim maintenance for self and a sum of Rs. 800/- as interim maintenance for the daughter.

(6) PETITIONER herein contested the said application and disputed about the alleged marriage on the ground that in view of the earlier marriage of the opposite party with one Paritosh kar, there cannot be any valid marriage with the petitioner herein but the learned Court below did not consider the objection raised, by the petitioner and also failed to consider the documents produced by the petitioner and granted a sum of Rs. 700/- as interim maintenance to opposite party and Rs. 500/-as interim maintenance to the minor daughter. Learned Court below also took into consideration a certificate of Marriage between the petitioner and opposite party and decided that in view of the certificate produced by the opposite party before the learned Court below, she shall be entitled to interim maintenance. The order granting interim maintenance was challenged before the learned revisional Court in connection with Criminal Revision No, 109 of 2004. The learned Revisional Court affirmed the said order.

(7) IT appears from the record that in spite of sending several notices, no appearance was effected by the opposite party herein and the matter is now decided after hearing the submission made by learned Advocate for the petitioner.

(8) LEARNED Advocate for the petitioner in support of his contention referred to a two-Judge Bench decision of Supreme Court in Savitaben Somabhai bhatiya vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., reported in AIR 2005 SC 1809, wherein the Supreme Court held at para 8, which is set out below: "8. There may be substance in the plea of learned Counsel for the appellant that law operates harshly against the woman who unwittingly gets into relationship with a married man and section 125 of the Code does not give protection to such woman. This may be an inadequacy in law, which only the legislature can undo. But as the position in law stands presently there is no escape from the conclusion that the expression wife as p