IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 609 OF 2007 609 OF 2007 609 OF 2007 Milind Jugolkshor Tiwari ...Applicant V/s. Nalini Milind Tiwari & Anr. ...Respondent Mr.Umesh G. Deshpande for the Applicant. CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH & V.M. KANADE, JJ. V.M. KANADE, JJ. V.M. KANADE, JJ. DATED : MARCH 11, 2008 DATED : MARCH 11, 2008 DATED : MARCH 11, 2008 P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- . Mentioned, not on board. 1. By this revision application, the applicant challenges an order passed by the Family Court under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. in favour of wife directing husband of the petitioner to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.4000/- per month. 2. It is clear from the order that though the applicant filed reply, he did not even cross-examine wife who was examined herself as a witness. In the absence of any material brought on record by the applicant, the trial Court based on the petition filed by the wife has made the order in the petition. There is no explanation why the applicant could not - 2 - cross-examine the witness wife. There is no explanation to be found why he did not apply to the trial Court to grant him an opportunity to cross-examine the witness. 3. We do not find any substance in the petition. It is rejected. (D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (D.K. DESHMUKH, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.) (V.M. KANADE, J.)