JUDGMENT :

1. This Revision is preferred against the order dated 06.05.2016 passed by the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rangia, Kamrup(R) in MC No.07/2014, directing the Revision Petitioner/husband to pay Rs. 2000/- per month from the date of order.

2. I have heard Mr. PK Bhagawati, learned counsel for the revision petitioners. I have also heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.

3. The respondent wife filed a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Court of SDJM(M), Rangia praying for maintenance for herself from the petitioner being the legally married wife. According to the respondent wife she was married with the present petitioner on 12.05.2013 as per Islamic Shariat but since after marriage her husband started to torture physically and mentally by demanding stridhan articles and also humiliate her on many occasions. That apart her husband used to maintain illicit relationship with his nice, Manju Begum and finally on 17.07.2013 she was outstate from matrimonial house by her husband by abusing her. She was compelled to return to her paternal house. As the petitioner/husband did not provide any maintenance to her and she has no source of income, she prayed for maintenance from her husband @ Rs. 5,000/- per month with the submission that her husband has an income of Rs.20,000/- per month from his cultivation.

4. The petitioner being the opposite party in the said case filed his written statement admitting that he married the petitioner Rina Begum on 12.05.2013 but denied to have mentally and physically tortured her. He denied to have demanded money from the parents of the first party and also denied to have illicit relationship with his niece. The OP alleged that the first party after marriage did not kept any physical relationship with him on various pretexts. The OP/second party alleged that the petitioner had extra marital relationship with her earlier lover and after 10 days of her marriage without seeking any permission she started visiting her parental house after every 2/3 days. On 14.07.2013 at about 8 am the petitioner left his house taking Rs.35,000/- in cash and ornaments in one VIP while he was working in the field. The OP contended that the petitioner left his house on her own will without any reason and as such the petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. After about one week from the day when the petitioner left his house the Gaonbura along with 5 elderly persons went to the house of petitioner to bring her back but she refused to come back and insulted the persons and drover them out. Thereafter again he sent his family members 2-3 times to the house of the petitioner/first party but she refused to come. The OP stated that he do not have any cultivable land and landed properties. He has to look after his widow sister and his niece. He works as daily wage earner. The OP/second party prayed for dismissal of the petition filed by the petitioner.

5. Both the parties examined witnesses in support of their respective claims and allegations and the learned trial court on consideration of such evidence allowed the prayer of the respondent wife and directed the present petitioner to pay Rs.2,000/- per month as maintenance allowance to his wife vide order dated 06.05.2016 in MC No.7/2014.

6. Challenging the aforesaid order, the present revision petition has been preferred.

7. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner the aforesaid order is not maintainable as the respondent wife wilfully avoided to consume the marriage with him and refused to return to him without any rhyme and reason and he still ready to accept her if she returns. The learned counsel for the respondent has however contended that there is no any cogent ground to challenge the impugned order as the respondent wife has properly proved by way of evidence about the negligence on the part of the petitioner towards the maintenance of his wife and the fact that she has no source of income.

8