JUDGMENT :

(Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.) :

1. The present revision has been preferred against an order dated 15/11/2018 passed in Miscellaneous Case No. 1116 of 2017 pending before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas granting interim maintenance.

2. The petitioner’s case is that the marriage between the petitioner and the Opposite Party No. 2 was solemnised as per Hindu rites and customs on 01.07.2014.

3. The present petitioner is employed with the Indian Army and was posted at Hissar Cantonment, Haryana at the time of his marriage.

4. After marriage, and after a brief stay at Saptapally, Deshbandhu Road, Habra, North 24 Parganas, the petitioner along with the Opposite Party No. 2, shifted to the Service Quarter of the petitioner at Hissar Cantonment, Haryana, where they started living as husband and wife.

5. On 25.03.2015 the petitioner took his wife, the Opposite Party No. 2, to her parent’s house, where the Opposite Party No. 2 and her parents requested the petitioner to leave his wife for few days and accordingly the petitioner, on good faith, left his wife at her parental house.

6. On 28.03.2015, the petitioner personally went to the parental house of the Opposite Party No. 2 to bring her back, as he had to join his duties at Hissar, Haryana on 10.04.2015 but she refused to go back.

7. Several attempts were made by the petitioner and by his parents to bring the Opposite Party No. 2 back to the present petitioner but all such attempts went in vain.

8. On 27.05.2015, the petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights, which was registered as Matrimonial Suit no. 106 of 2015. The said Matrimonial Suit No. 106 of 2015 was decreed Ex Parte in favour of the petitioner by the Learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track, 5th Court at Barasat on 27.05.2016.

9. That after getting such Decree the petitioner made repeated attempts to bring the Opposite Party No. 2 back with him but as earlier all such attempts have failed to yield any positive results.

10. The Opposite Party No. 2 has filed two applications, one under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, being Miscellaneous Case No. 105 of 2015 and another under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. But both the cases were dismissed for default.

11. The Opposite Party has also filed a complaint before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Barrackpore, which was later registered as Noapara Police Station Case No. 183 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3549 of 2015 (under Sections 498A/406 etc. of Indian Penal Code) and the same is pending.

12. The Opposite Party No. 2 has also filed a complaint under Sections 307/406/420/440/506 of the Indian Penal Code, which has been registered as Noapara Police Station Case No. 233 of 2015 and the same too is pending.

13. Since all such attempts to bring the Opposite Party back to the petitioner have failed for a period of 2 years approximately, the present petitioner has filed Matrimonial Suit No. 196 of 2017 for a Decree of Divorce on the grounds of desertion.

14. In the said Matrimonial Suit bearing No. 196 of 2017, the Opposite Party appeared and filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act and while allowing the said application bearing Miscellaneous (Matrimonial) Case No. 1725 of 2017, Learned Additional District Judge, 5th Court at Barasat was pleased to direct the present petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 8,000/-per month for the Opposite Party No. 2 and Rs. 3,000/-per month for their minor son.

15. The Opposite party, inspite of refusing the said Money Order has illegally and with Mala fide intention filed another application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance, for herself as well as for the minor son, which has been registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 1116 of 2017 and the same is pending before Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court at Barrackpore.

16. T