Once the learned Magistrate declined to grant maintenance for reasons specified, it was not open for him to assume jurisdiction in a proceeding under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. which was not pending before him and was a completely independent proceeding to direct grant of maintenance under the same. The two being independent proceedings, the learned Magistrate wrongly assumed jurisdiction under Section 125 Cr.P.C in a proceeding under the Act. In effect, what the magistrate directly declined to the respondent, he granted indirectly by observing that till the proceedings under section 125 of Cr.P.C. is not decided, the appellants shall pay maintenance at a rate of Rs.2,000/- per month to the respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1613 OF 2019
P. RAJKUMAR & ANR. Vs YOGA @ YOGALAKSHMI
Dated: OCTOBER 23, 2019.
Coram: NAVIN SINHA J, B.R. GAVAI J