XI-HC—78 ^TI^T ?5T ^Jch TT^n ^S^l 5bHicb :< 1\. —--; \- 3^c[ •^WW^, ^>Tf1^1i<5, fsj^Wy ^^.A.:.^.....^...z.8.^^^ 3n^?r ^ra^ (i^I^c^T) '^TTW^f^T 31T^?r SB: HOrBLB DHIK^NDRA MISHRA, J. FETITIONER Vs RESFynpBNTs 1. 2. 22-8-2007 Shri Rakesh Paadevl This petition under the order of Annexure F|l- Revision No. 4/2007 by wiiereby Uie revision pret^rrecl Annexure P-8 dated 22-2t 122/2005 by fhe Judici^l rejected. Grievaiice of fhe under Section 125 of CrJ parents of tlie appUcaiit, c|TT1£lf^frT^TO^f '£ffs^ <f^^l< '^3tRR3^T^T Kishun Siiigh, S/o. Sagun Siagh Chauhaa, aged about 35 years, R/o. Daupara, Kabir Ward, Behiad Hari Prasad Dharaoishala, MungeU Police Station Mungeli, District Buaspur Sagun Singh, son of Pawan Suigh Chauhaii, aged about 75 years, Kainala Bai, W/o Sagun Suigh Chauhan, aged about 70 yeai's, bofh are rcsident of Daupara, Kabir Ward, behind Ha-n Prasad DhaTajnshala Mungeu, Police Station Mungeli, District BUaspur (C.G,) Advocate for the applicaat. pection 482 of Cr,P.C. is preferred agam.st 1-1 dated 12-7-2007 passed ia Cnmiaal fhe Additional Sessions Jiidge, MimgeU by the appiLcaiit agaiast the order of -2007 passed in. Misc. Crtmiiial Case No. Magistrate Class I, MungeU iias been artplicaiit is tliat in. a maiiiteuaiice petition |P.C. filed by fhe nou-appiLcaD.ts who are |a preliiiiniaiy objectiou was taken by fhe ^n^T^RT (<Tlicb '?CT3?iR^T s»i*iiq» "<J'f' ?1- ^^cT^n^T^T, ^Tn<Mjl<o, Rl^l<-l^< ^^.^(Mc3.^^3/o?- ^Wv{{ *t<lch ••"•—'—"—"""•""""""•——•"• -^ 200 3nip?r TT^R (4^^^) '^iTW^rf?^ ^TF^T astle appUcaiit before fhe Magi^ applicaiits are necessaiy maintenaiice. The said app4< Magistrate, however szibse<|| its own order aad set applicants were directed to| applicaiit preferred cnim4 however, me same has been) Learaed couiisel for does not have uiherent po^ order taipugned is patenfty Takuig uito has been filed by the further considering Uiat the| necessaiy parties for the Cr,P.C, preferred by the paij^ is of the opuiion that no ii|i orders while exercising Uie j^ The petition beuig aiicl it is disinissed. pa^tiles tlie consideraltion par^iits pii|rposes chHfd41T1 ^Wdf'^'f^t <Ryi<^'< '^'3tfOT3iTI^T ktra.te that the other sons of the non- for the purpose of tlie appUcation for )4cation was earUer allowed by the Judicial juentiy fhe Judicial Magistrate reviewed its earlier order by which fhe non- |maxe the otlier sons as tlie parties, The ^.al revision agamst the above order, rejected by Uie iaipugned order. applicaiit subBiits fh.at the tdal Court fer to review its own order, therefore, me liiegai. that fhe application for niaiatenaiice agauist me present applicant aiici ofher sons of the non-appUcants are uot u|rposes ofproceediag under section 125 of ?nts against one of tiieir sons, tliis Court ii|iterfereuce is calied for ta Uie impugned j^irisdiction under Sectiou 482 ofCr.P.C, of substaiice is Uable to be disniissed ae^oici Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge GRPRJ— FS/246—2/2007— 50,000. 1