1 Smt.Raisa vs. Mehboob Khan S.B.Cri. Revision Petition No.706/08 Date of Order : 15.12.2008 HON'BLE MR. MANAK MOHTA, J. Ms. Pramila Acharya for the petitioner. Mr.Vishnu Kachhawaha , Public Prosecutor. The instant revision petition has been filed by Smt. Raisa against the order passed by the learned Judge, family Court , Jodhpur dated 10.04.08 in criminal original case No.156/03 whereby her application filed under section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance was rejected. In brief, the facts of the case for the just disposal of this revision petition are as under : Smt. Raisa filed an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband Mehboob Khan alleging that on 19.01.99 at village Richholi, Tehsil Pachpadra, District Barmer she got married with respondent . For some time she lived with him, further it was stated in the petition that thereafter, she was left. She has stated that she has no means to maintain herself and her husband is having means. On that basis, the petition 2 was filed. Notice was issued. The respondent in his reply denied the factum of marriage. The learned family court, after recording the evidence of both the sides vide order dated 10.04.08 found that the marriage is not proved and dismissed the application. Against that the present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner. Notice of this petition was issued, record of the case was called and arguments were heard. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that before the learned family court it was amply proved by the evidence of the petitioner herself as well as other witnesses. She has also produced the 'nikahnama' , Ex.1, a written document in corroboration of marriage. But the learned family court, without appreciating the evidence in right perspective and influenced by the criminal case registered against the petitioner, has erroneously rejected the application vide said order. Therefore, no maintenance was determined. It was urged that the respondent has not been able to prove that marriage was not solemnized. He has taken the plea that his signatures were obtained under threat. This defence is neither proved nor is sustainable. On the basis of aforesaid 3 submissions, a request was made to allow the revision petition and it was prayed that application for maintenance be allowed and suitable maintenance be awarded. On the contrary, learned counsel for the respondent refuted the contentions and supported the judgment given by the learned family court. I have considered the rival contentions and deeply perused the evidence produced by both the sides and the other material available on record. From the side of petitioner in addition to petitioner herself other witnesses PW/2 Ibrahim, PW/3 Shaffi Mohammed, PW/4 Aabdul Gafoor & PW/5 Isaq have been produced. They were stated to be present at the time of nikah. The scribe of Ex.A/1 has also been produced. He has also supported the petitioner's version. On the contrary, respondent Mehboob Khan has appeared, he has denied the factum of marriage. Further he has stated that his signatures were obtained under threat. NAW/2 Farid Khan and NAW/3 Bhure Khan have been produced from the respondent's side. On the basis of aforesaid 4 perusal of evidence and other material, the finding given by the learned family court that marriage has not been proved is not sustainable. The learned family court has not properly appreciated and considered the material available on record. In these circumstances, I consider it a fit case to send back the case for afresh hearing as the learned family court has also not considered the quantum of compensation. In these circumstances, in the fitness of things, case is required to be remitted back for afresh hearing. As the case is remitted, therefore, the detailed discussion over the statement of the witnesses and the conclusion drawn thereon is not in the interest of the parties. On the basis of aforesaid discussion, the revision petition is partly allowed and the judgment passed by the learned family court is hereby quashed and the case is remitted back for afresh hearing, after giving opportunity of hearing to both the parties. For the appearance of the parties before the learned family court 05th January, 2009 is fixed. The revision stands disposed of accordingly. (MANAK MOHTA), J. 5 l.george