SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Raj) 2

High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Dwarka Prasad
GOKUL SIRGH - Appellant
Versus
MAYA - Respondent
Criminal Misc. Petition 393 Of 1985
Decided On : 01/02/1986

Advocates Appeared:
R.P.GARG

Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973-Section 125-Application under section 125 pending since 12.121981 - Petitioner's husband unnecessarily delaying the proceedings-Matter has remained pending for the evidence of the petitioner/husband since October 15, 1984-Interim order passed granting provisional maintenance -Challenged - Whether the Criminal Court can pass an interim order during the pendency of proceedings under section 125 of the Code? (Yes) (Para 7)

       Result-

       Petition dismissed.

       

Judgment


DWARKA PRASAD, J.

( 1 ) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner.

( 2 ) THE question which has been canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner in this application under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code is-as to whether the Criminal Court Wearing a petition under, section 125 Criminal procedure Code can pass an interim order during, the pendency of those proceeding. The learned Magistrate has stated in the order dated July 15, 1985 that the application under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code is pending since December 12, 1981 and the petitioners husband is unnecessarily delaying the proceedings. The matter has remained pending for the evidence of the petitioners husband side October 15, 1984 and in a period order months the husband examined himself and has not produced his evidence inspite several opportunities, but be was still seeking time for proceeding his evidence. In these circumstances, the trial Magistrate passed an interim order granting provisional maintenance to the wife at the rate of Rs. 250/-per month.

( 3 ) IT is not necessary to go into the broad question raised by learned counsel in the facts and circumstances of the case: The trial Magistrate, in the facts and circumstances when the proceedings under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code have remained pending for more than four years, passed the order fixing a provisional maintenance. This Court need not interfere in its power under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code with the order passed by the trial Magistrate in the present case, looking to the facts and circumstances referred to above.

( 4 ) THE application under section 482 Criminal Procedure Code is dismissed. The trial Magistrate is directed to expedite the disposal of the application under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code. Application dismissed.




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top