1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO 216 of 1999 Date of decision: 7/9/2009 For approval and signature HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.U.CHANDIWAL 1. Whether the Reporters of Local Papers Yes/No. may be allowed to see the Judgment ? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? Yes/No 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see Yes/No. the fair copy of the Judgment ? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial? Yes/No. question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950, or any order made thereunder ? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Yes/No. Civil Judges ? 6. Whether the case involves an important Yes/No question of law and whether a copy of the Order should be sent to Bombay, Goa and Nagpur Office ? (A.G. PARALIKAR) Private Secretary agp/office/216-99 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO 216 of 1999 Kalyan Laxman Gade, Aged 33 years, Occ. agriculture, Resident of Malegaon Thadi, Taluka Kopargaon, Dist. Ahmednagar. ...PETITIONER VERSUS 1. Sau. Ratanbai Kalyan Gade, Aged 22 years, Occ. household, resident of Bolhegaon, Taluka and District Ahmednagar. 2. The State of Maharashtra. ...RESPONDENTS ... None for the petitioner. Mrs. B.R.Khekale, APP for respondent/State. ... CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 7/9/2009 *** ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. Counsel called. Absent. 2. Grant of maintenance to the wife is subject of criticism. 3. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, by order dt.19.4.1999, directed the husband Kalyan 3 Gade to pay to Ratanbai monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs.100/- with costs of Rs.200/-. 4. The allegation of the husband was the wife was already pregnant before marriage. Consequently, he parted company. However, in paragraph No.8 the learned Additional Sessions Judge did not agree to this situation as there is nothing to demonstrate the same. The learned Judge observed that since the husband claims to be a poor person, it was not practically possible that he was carrying Rs.20,000/- at the material time or paid the same to the wife Ratanbai. 5. Considering the status of the parties, the award of maintenance, indicated above, does not require any interference. Criminal Writ Petition dismissed. Rule discharged. ( K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE agp/216-99crwp