( 1 ) THE Revision Petitioner, who is a wife of Revision opponent No. 2 has, by filing this Criminal Revision Application under Sec. 397 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, (In short cr. P. C. ) challenged the legality, correctness and propriety of judgment Exh. 23 dated 20th September, 1997, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Surat, (who will be referred to as the learned Judge of the Revisional Court) in Criminal Revision Application no. 130 of 1996.

( 2 ) THE facts leading to this present Criminal Revision Application, in a nutshell are as follows :2. 1 Applicant-Bai Sahinda Abdulla Nathalwala filed one Maintenance application under Sec. 125 of Cr. P. C. for herself and for her one minor child against her husband Arif Salim Memon in the Court of learned J. M. F. C. , 2nd Court, Surat, (who will be referred to hereinafter as the learned Magistrate ). That Maintenance Application came to be registered as Maintenance Application no. 40 of 1993. As per facts stated in that maintenance application, applicant married with opponent Arif Salim Memon about three years before 3rd May, 1993, according to Islamic Shariyat, as both of them are governed by mohammedan Law. After marriage, applicant-wife and her husband both started to live together as husband and wife, and out of their wedlock, applicant delivered one child who was aged about 1. 3/4 years as on date of her application. As on date of her Maintenance Application she was pregnant. That Maintenance application was finally decided and the learned Magistrate rendered his judgment dated 8-11-1996. During the pendency of that Maintenance Application, she delivered another child named salman on or about 11-6-1993. 2. 2 In mat Maintenance Application, it is alleged by the applicant- wife that, on or about 1-4-1993, the husband gave divorce (Talak) to the applicant- wife in presence of witnesses. It is also the case of the applicant that as the husband was giving mental and physical torture/cruelty to her, she went to house of her parents in the month of November, 1992, and since thereafter, the husband has never taken any care of applicant as well as her children for maintenance. The applicant and her two children are deserted and neglected by the husband for being maintained by the opponent-husband. It is the case of the applicant that husband is carrying on business and earns Rs. 5. 000/- p. m. , and therefore, in her maintenance application she has claimed maintenance under Sec. 125 of cr. P. C. at the rate of Rs. 500/- p. m. for her own self As on the date of her application, she had only one female minor child named hina, she has claimed Rs. 500/- p. m. , as maintenance for that minor child Hina. 2. 3 In the proceeding of that Maintenance Application, the opponent No. 2-husband appeared before the learned Magistrate and contested the said application by tiling his written statement. The Opponent-husband has practically denied all the pleadings of the applicant-wife pleaded in maintenance application on the contrary, he has found fault with the applicant-wife. It is the case of the opponent-husband that, applicant herself left the matrimonial home without any cause being given by him. He requested the learned Magistrate to dismiss the application of applicant-wife. 2. 4 The learned Magistrate framed necessary points for determination. Both the parties led their oral as well as documentary evidence in that Maintenance application. After appreciating the evidence led by both the parties and after hearing the arguments of the learned Advocates for both the parties, the learned magistrate by rendering his judgment Exh. 21 dated 8-11-1996 allowed that maintenance application and ordered and directed the opponent-husband to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 450/- p. m. , to applicant No. 1 i. e. , wife from the date of application; Rs. 350/- p. m. , as maintenance to applicant No. 2 i. e. , minor Hina w. e. f 3rd May, 1993, and Rs. 300/- p. m. , as maintenance