( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 130 OF 2009 Pooja w/o Sunil Gaikwad and another. PETITIONERS VERSUS Sunil s/o Shivaji Gaikwad RESPONDENT ..... Mr. P.K. Palve, advocate for the petitioners. Mr. V.D. Borwankar, advocate for respondent No. 1. Mrs. R.D. Reddy, APP for respondent No.2/State. ..... [CORAM : V.R. KINGAONKAR, J.] [DATE : 18th August, 2009] PER COURT : 1. By this petition, the petitioners seek to challenge order dated 22-12-2008 rendered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmednagar whereby petitioner No. 1 was not awarded any interim maintenance allowance, but only the minor applicant No. 2 has been awarded interim maintenance allowance at Rs. 300/- p.m. 2. Heard learned counsel. ( 2 ) 3. The main proceedings under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code bearing Cri.Misc. Application No. 55/2008 are in the midst of final hearing. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioner No. 1 – Pooja is now appearing for cross- examination. It is agreed by the counsel that if the main application is expedited for final hearing, the purpose of the petition will be served. 4. By consent, the final hearing of Cri. Misc. Application No. 55/2008 is expedited. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate shall allow cross-examination of the petitioner No. 1 – Pooja and may record further evidence on her behalf on the scheduled date. The hearing may be taken up de-die-in-diem. The respondent No. 1 be not given more than three (3) adjournments which also shall be of not more than ¾ days each and thus, the final hearing be completed within one month and the main proceedings be decided on merits. If the respondent No. 1 will seek any further adjournment, on fourth occasion, the learned Magistrate may impose heavy cost and on ( 3 ) fifth adjournment, may forfeit the right of adducing the evidence. With these directions, the petition is disposed of. [ V.R. KINGAONKAR ] JUDGE NPJ/CRIWP130-09