1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Criminal Application No.2954 of 2008 (Sou Meena w/o Shankarsingh Parihar v. Shri Shankarsingh Narayansingh Parihar and another) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-- Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions : Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Shri M.P. Kariya, Advocate for Applicant. Shri Firdos Mirza, Advocate for R- 1. APP for R- 2. CORAM : R.C. Chavan, J. DATE : 13th October, 2008 The applicant, whose claim for maintenance, has been rejected by the learned Magistrate as well the learned Additional Sessions Judge, is in a bind. She cannot now contend that her husband has refused to maintain her, since he had deposited a hefty sum of Rs.95,617/-, which she withdrew in the year 2003. In addition to this, her husband, i.e. the respondent, is already paying the maintenance for the children. If there are any further demands for the children, the applicants can always move the learned Magistrate bringing out the change in circumstances. Hence, no case for invocation of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is made out. Consequently, the application is rejected. JUDGE Lanjewar