KING-EMPEROR vs BUDHOO MANDAL GOND - 1948 Supreme(Nagpur) 95

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1948 Supreme(Nagpur) 95

HEMEON
KING-EMPEROR – Appellant
Versus
BUDHOO MANDAL GOND – Respondent

JUDGMENT

Hemeon, J—The non-applicant Budboo was sentenced to undergo four months rigorous imprisonment under Section 488(3), Criminal P.C., by the First Class Magistrate, Bilaspur, for his failure to pay Rs. 40, maintenance allowance to his wife at the rate of Rs. 10 per mensem; and the Sessions Judge, Raipur, has now reported the case under Section 488, Criminal P.C., to have that sentence reduced to one month, the maximum prescribed by Section 488(3), ibid.

2. The reference cannot be accepted and it appears to me that it was founded on a mistaken view of the effect of Section 488(3), Criminal P.C. It is true that in Queen-Empress v. Narain, it was held that the maximum term of imprisonment under the Sub-section in question was one month, and that only one month's imprisonment could be awarded on the whole in default of payment of the aggregate of the amounts due. That View was, however, dissented from in Allapichai Bavuthar v. Mohidin Bibi, in which a Division Bench of the Madras High Court held that the maximum imprisonment where one warrant only was issued was one month for each month's arrears of maintenance and if there was a balance for a portion of a month a further term of a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document