( 1. ) THIS revision aims at setting aside the order dated 18-11-2003 passed by the learned Fifth Addl. Sessions Judge, Ujjain in Cr. Rev. No. 131/2003 thereby setting aside the order dated 10-5-2003 passed in Misc. Cr, Case No. 8/01 by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tarana. The learned Revisional Court granted maintenance to the wife Rekhabai at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- from 17-3-2001 with costs Rs. 1,000/- while the learned Trial Court allowed the application only in respect of non-applicant No. 2 granting him maintenance @ 1,000/- per month from the date of the order till he attains majority and costs Rs. 500/ -. Against the aforesaid order, the applicant/husband has preferred this revision.

( 2. ) BRIEF facts giving rise to this revision are that the non-applicant Rekhabai and her son Kamal had filed an application for grant of maintenance before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Tarana on the ground that the applicant is the husband of non-applicant Rekhabai and she gave birth to a son named Kamal. According to non-applicant Rekhabai in their community, there is custom of dissolution of marriage and custom of second marriage in NATRA form of marriage. She had divorced her former husband named Kailash according to community-custom prevailing in Khati Samaj. Prior to the present application under Section 125, Cr. PC the first application was dismissed vide Case No. 11/96 by order dated 1-12-97. Thereafter, at the time of death of the father of applicant Harinarayan, there was a compromise between the parties in presence of Panchas and after executing a document (Ex. A-2) on 10-9-2000 Harinarayan took her and son Kamal and they started living together as husband and wife. Thereafter, the applicant Harinarayan started beating her and also levelling allegations against her character and he ultimately turned her out of the house for which she lodged a report (Ex. A-3) at the Police Station, Maksi. The applicant refused to maintain her. Therefore, she filed an application for grant of maintenance. She examined herself and witnesses Dayashankar, Nandkishore, Haricharan, Shivnarayan, Babulal and Mohanlal.

( 3. ) THE applicant, by filing reply, denied the claim of the wife/non-applicant. He had refused to accept her as his wife and Kamal to be his son. He also denied the second marriage in Natra-form of marriage, prevalent in his community. He has only examined himself in support of his contention.

( 4. ) THE learned Trial Court refused to grant maintenance to the non-applicant on the ground that Harinarayans former wives were alive and the former husband of non-applicant Rekhabai was also alive. Therefore, their marriage was null and void and she can not claim maintenance from the applicant. However, the learned Trial Court granted maintenance to the son Kamal. Against this order, the applicant did not prefer any revision and the non-applicant/wife challenged the same before the Lower Revisional Court. The learned Lower Revisional Court, after hearing the rival contentions and considering the various pronouncements of the High Courts and the Apex Court as mentioned in Para 7 of is order, allowed the revision holding that the non-applicant/wife has proved that in their community, i. e. , Khati community there was a custom of dissolution of marriage and second marriage in Natra-form. She and Harinarayan after giving divorce to their previous spouses in accordance with the customs prevalent in the community entered into a Natra-form of marriage. The learned Rcvisional Court set aside the order of the learned Trial Court and granted maintenance to the wife/non-applicant @ Rs. 1,000/- per month from the date of filing of the application, ( 5. ) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant relying on the Supreme Court judgments rendered Smt. Yamunabai Adhav v. Anantrao Adhav and Anr. (AIR 1988 SC 644) and Khemchand Omprakash Sharma v. State of Gujrat, (2000) 3 SCC 753, has submitted that the first wife of the applicant