IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.949 OF 2008 Sukdeo Damu Shinde .. Petitioner Vs. Mandyabai Sukdeo Shinde & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Sachin D. Kadam for the petitioner. Mrs.P.P.Shinde, A.P.P for the State. CORAM CORAM CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 28th August 2008. P.C.: . Heard advocate for the petitioner. The 1st and 2nd respondents filed an application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of maintenance. The petitioner contested the said application by contending that there was no legal and valid marriage between him and 1st respondent. The petitioner also disputed the paternity of 2nd respondent. After considering the evidence on record and in particular the entry in the register maintained under the provisions of the Registration of Birth and Deaths Act, 1969, Both the learned Magistrate as well as the learned Sessions Judge negatived the second contention of the petitioner. The maintenance of Rs.1,000/- per month has been granted by the trial Court : 2 : to the 2nd respondent son and the said order has been confirmed by the Sessions Court. 2. The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the alleged entry in the register of births and deaths maintained by the Gram Panchayat was suspicious and the name and address of the person who gave information of the birth does not find place in the said entry. It is submitted that there is a serious doubt about credibility and the truthfulness of the said entry. Reliance is placed on the fact that there were two entries made in the birth and death register. 3. The aforesaid submissions have been considered by the learned trial Judge. The learned trial Judge noted that the petitioner admitted in cross-examination that entry was made in the register in the year 1999 showing his name as the father of the 2nd respondent and that the petitioner had stated that he was proposing to initiate action against the Gram Sevak. The learned Judge found that no such action was initiated by the petitioner and no complaint was filed by the petitioner as regards the said entry made by the Gram Sevak. The learned Sessions Judge has observed that the perusal of : 3 : the register shows that the information of the birth was given by a peon of Gram Panchayat and an Anganwadi Sevika but this endorsement is not signed. Considering the evidence of the petitioner, the Courts below have held that only on the basis of the aforesaid infirmities, the genuineness of the entries cannot be disputed. 4. The impugned orders are rendered in a proceeding under section 125 of the said Code of 1973 which is required to be decided by adopting a summary procedure. There is hardly any scope for interference in this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India considering the findings recorded by the Courts below. It is obvious that notwithstanding the impugned orders, it will be open for the petitioner to approach Civil Court and claim appropriate declaration. As is provided by sub section 2 of section 127 of the said Code, an order under section 125 can be varied or cancelled on the basis of a judgment of competent Civil Court. 5. Subject to what is observed above, no case is made out for interference. Petition is rejected. : 4 : (A.S.Oka,J)