1. Respondent wife sought maintenance from her husband, petitioner herein (hereafter they are referred to as the husband and wife) under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, alleging that she had been deserted by him for reasons of bringing insufficient dowry and had been living with her parents almost from the inception of the marriage. The husband in his written statement claimed that she had deserted him on her own when he did not agree to her demand that he should adopt the cult of Sacha Sauda.

2. The trial Magistrate allowed maintenance and Revision Petition of the husband was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda. The husband has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court for quashing both these orders on the ground that Courts below have acted illegally and against the letter of law by not feeling bound by the Civil Court decision between the parties rendered in a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the wife.

3. The maintenance proceedings were launched by the wife on March 22, 1977. This was after the matrimonial Court had dismissed wifes petition for restitution of congugal rights vide order dated January 19, 19