A divorced wife continues to enjoy the status of wife for claiming maintenance.

1. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The instant misc. petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioner husband challenging the order dated 21.9.2011 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Banswara in Criminal Revision No. 30/2011, whereby the Revisional Court rejected the revision filed by the petitioner and affirmed the order dated 3.5.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bagidora whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Sections 127 and 205 Cr.P.C.

3. Succinctly stated the facts necessary for the disposal of the instant misc. petition are that the respondent herein, who is the petitioner's wife, filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the Trial Court in the year 1991. The said application was rejected on 24.1.1998. The respondent filed a revision against the rejection of her application. The Revisional Court vide order dated 6.9.2000 allowed the revision and directed that the respondent shall be entitled to receive a sum of Rs. 500/- per month as maintenance from the petitioner from the date of filing of the application. The petitioner assailed the said order by way of a misc. petition before this Court being S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 558/2000. This Court partly accepted the said misc. petition and modified the order dated 6.9.2000 and made the same effective from the date of Revisional Court's order dated 6.9.2000 instead of the date of filing of the application.

4. The petitioner in the meantime had filed an application Under SeCt/OD 9 Of the Hindu Marriage Act against the respondent. The said application was allowed by order dated 26.7,1997. It appears that the respondent did not comply with the said order of restitution of conjugal rights. Accordingly, the petitioner filed an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the District Court, Banswara. The District Court, Banswara accepted the application for divorce on the ground of desertion by the respondent.

5. The petitioner accordingly in the light of the decree of divorce filed an application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. praying that once the competent Court had granted decree of divorce to the petitioner husband on the ground of desertion committed by the respondent, thereafter, she would not be entitled to claim and receive any maintenance from the petitioner.

6. The said application was rejected by the learned Judicial Magistrate by order dated 3.5.2011. it was held in the said order that as the amount of maintenance was directed to be paid to the respondent in terms of the order passed by this Court in the earlier misc. petition, the learned Judicial Magistrate had no powers or jurisdiction to interfere in the same. The petitioner unsuccessfully assailed the said order by filing revision which came to be rejected by order dated 21.9.2011. The petitioner has now approached this Court challenging the aforesaid orders by way of the instant misc. petition.

7. Mr. Prabhat Ojha, learned Counsel for the petitioner, vehemently relied on the fact that the petitioner had been granted divorce from the respondent on the ground of desertion by the respondent and, therefore, she would not be entitled to claim any further maintenance from the petitioner. He urged that it is the respondent who failed to perform her matrimonial obligations despite the decree of the competent Court and, therefore, there could not be any justification for her to be provided maintenance from the petitioner. Relying on the decision of this Court in the case of Kachari (Smt.) v. Vijay Singh, reported in 2012(3) Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 1368 , he submitted that the orders impugned be quashed and the petitioner be absolved of his obligation to pay maintenance to the respondent.

8. Per contra, the learned Counsel for the respondent wife opposed the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioner. He urged that the decree of divorce granted to the petitioner has been challenged by t