IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-35395 of 2009 (O and M) Date of Decision : April 21, 2011. Karam Singh ...... Petitioner. Versus. Manjit Kaur and others ..... Respondent. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present:- Mr. Malkeet Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Petitioner in person. Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate, for the respondents. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL). Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon Annexure-P-8 to state that on 22.8.2009 a Lok Adalat was held at Ajnala, which consisted of Shri B.S. Deol, PCS, Presiding Officer, Lok Adalat-cum-Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala, Dr. H.S. Bhalla, Member Lok Adalat, Sub Divisional Court, Ajnala, and Shri J.S. Chouhan, Member Lok Adalat, Sub Divisional Court, Ajnala-cum-President, Bar Association, Ajnala. The Lok Adalat in its Award dated 22.8.2009 had awarded a maintenance of Rs. 9,000/- per month to respondents No. 1 to 5. The grievance of the petitioner is that he has been fastened with this maintenance by the Lok Adalat without realising the fact that one Member of the Lok Adalat, namely, Shri J.S. Chouhan was counsel for the respondent (aggrieved wife). Therefore, it is stated that the Order 10.9.2009 (Annexure-P- 7) passed by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala, on the basis of Award of the Lok Adalat dated 22.8.2009, cannot sustain as bias is writ large. He further submits that the award of the Lok Adalat was not impartial as counsel for the other party was on the Bench of Lok Adalat. Thus, this Court should set aside the Award of the Lok Adalat dated 22.8.2009 (Annexure-P-6) Crl. Misc. No. M-35395 of 2009 (O and M) -2- and Order (Annexure-P-7) passed in pursuance thereof by the Court of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala, on 10.9.2009. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 5 has stated that from the date the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed, respondent No. 1 being wife and respondents No. 2 to 5 being minor children of the petitioner were entitled to maintenance but till date not even a single penny has been paid to them. After hearing counsel for the parties, the Award (Annexure-P-6) and impugned Order (Annexure-P-7) are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala, to decide the application instituted under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by respondents No. 1 to 5 on merits. The said application shall be decided within four months after affording due opportunity to lead evidence to the parties. The application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was instituted on 4.2.2009. Since then dependent wife and children have not been paid any amount. Therefore, the petitioner shall deposit Rs. 50,000/- towards past maintenance in the trial Court on the date of appearance. This amount, after decision of the trial Court, shall be adjusted towards amount of maintenance, which is to be paid to respondents No. 1 to 5. In case, the trial Court comes to a conclusion that no maintenance is to be paid to the respondents, the amount so deposited by the petitioner, shall be returned to him. The parties are directed to appear before the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala, on 5.5.2011. (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA) JUDGE April 21, 2011 sjks