wp862.13

-1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 862 OF 2013

1.

Renuka W/o Dhanraj Dumane,

Age. 32 Years, Occu. Household,

R/o. Tambala, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur,

Now Residing at House of

Sidramappa Shankarappa Hatte,

R/o. Tambala, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur.

2.

Nitesh S/o Dhanraj Dumane,

Age. 2½ Years,

U/g of his natural mother i.e. petitioner No. 1 ...Petitioners

Versus

1.

Dhanraj S/o Shankarappa Dumane,

Age. 35 Years, Occu. Service,

R/o. Tambala, Tq. Nilanga, Dist. Latur

Now residing at S.T. Department,

Paithan, Tq. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad.

2.

The State of Maharashtra.

...Respondents

...

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. C.R. Deshpande and Mr. H. V. Tungar,

Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr. Sunil B. Kakde

APP for Respondent No.2 : Mr. A.R. Kale

.....

CORAM : V. K. JADHAV, J.

DATED : 17^th OCTOBER, 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT:-

1.

Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. By consent, heard finally at

admission stage.

2.

Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 7.4.2012

passed by J.M.F.C. Nilanga in criminal Misc. Criminal Application

wp862.13

-2-

No. 113 of 2010 and the judgment and order passed by the

Additional Sessions Judge, Nilanga dated 12.7.2013, in criminal

revision No. 10 of 2012, thereby confirming the order passed by the

Magistrate, the original applicants have filed present writ petition.

3.

Brief facts giving rise to the present criminal writ petition are as

follows:-

a)

The petitioner No.1 wife has married with respondent No.1

husband. Petitioner No.2 is their son born out of their marital

wedlock. The marriage of petitioner No.1-wife and respondent No.1-

husband was solemnized in the year 2007. After the marriage she

was treated well for a period of two months and thereafter she was

subjected to ill-treatment on various counts. Respondent No.1

husband started suspecting about her character and used to beat

and abuse her on that count. Petitioner No.1 became pregnant and

she went to her parents house in March, 2008. She gave birth to

petitioner No.2. However, respondent husband went to her parents

house and told them that his first wife could not conceive for 7 years

and how she could conceive within a year from the date of marriage.

The respondent husband further questioned the paternity of the said

child. Even he had beaten the petitioner-wife in presence of her

parents. Respondent husband has refused and neglected to maintain

wp862.13

-3-

the petitioner wife and her son though having sufficient means. Thus,

the petitioner wife and her minor son constrained to file an

application bearing criminal Misc. application No. 113 of 2010 before

the Magistrate for grant of maintenance of Rs.4000/- p.m. to

petitioner No.1 wife and Rs.1500/- p.m. to petitioner No.2 son.

Respondent husband has not filed any say to the said application for

grant of maintenance nor examined himself before the court. The

respondent husband has filed certified copy of judgment and order

passed in H.M.P. No. 36 of 2010 by the civil Court, wherein the

decree for restitution of conjugal rights came to be passed in his

favour. The learned Magistrate by his impugned order dated

7.4.2012, partly allowed the application and thereby directed the

respondent husband to pay Rs.1000/- (Rs. one thousand) p.m. as

maintenance to petitioner No.2 (minor son). However, the

application of petitioner No.1 for grant of maintenance came to be

rejected on the ground that the respondent husband got decree for

restitution of conjugal rights and thus, it is now concluded that the

respondent wife herself deserted respondent husband and she is

staying with her parents without any just cause. Being ag