1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. CRI.WRIT PETITION NO.7 OF 2008 (KIRAN LALCHAND KHANDARE VS. SAU.RINAKIRAN KHANDARE & ANR.) _____________________________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Court's or Judge's orders ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Shri Anil J. Thakkar, Advocate for Petitioner Shri H.M.Mohta h/f. Shri C.A.Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM : R.C.CHAVAN, J. DATED : NOVEMBER 11, 2008. 1. By this petition the petitioner-husband takes exception to the rejection of his revision application by the learned Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, thereby leaving undisturbed order passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola, directing him to pay maintenance allowance @ Rs.750/- and Rs.500/- per month, respectively to Non- applicants No.1 and 2. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that he wanted to tender evidence before the learned Magistrate to show that respondent No.1 was living in adultery. For this 2 purpose he was to examine one Haji Mohammed Isak and Motiram Dongre. He states that both the witnesses were threatened by the respondents' relation and therefore, they could not attend the Court and that he had filed a pursis to this effect at Exh.71 before the trial Court. This pursis will hardly suffice to establish that respondent No.1 was living in adultery. The petitioner ought to have reported to the police about the threats given to those witnesses and sought an adjournment and had that adjournment been refused by the Court he could have raised a grievance that he was not given opportunity to prove that he was not liable to pay maintenance allowance. 4. The judgments rendered by both the Courts below do not indicate any deficiency to warrant invocation of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. JUDGE RR.