Skip to content


Musammat Mahaginia Vs. Ram Charan - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1914All368; 25Ind.Cas.327a
AppellantMusammat Mahaginia
RespondentRam Charan
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), sections 438, 483 - maintenance--revision--power of district magistrate to take evidence. - .....that ram charan was their father. mahaginia has since been delivered of a second child. the joint magistrate rejected her petition. she then applied to the district magistrate who examined several more witnesses and has sent the case to this court with a recommendation that the finding of the joint. magistrate be reversed and that mahaginia be awarded maintenance at the rate of rs. 3 per mensem for her two children against ram charan. the district magistrate's recommendation cannot be accepted in its entirety; for it appears to me that he had no power to take evidence under, section 438, code of criminal procedure, and if he had power to take evidence it was only for the purpose of a recommendation to this court and i cannot upon it proceed to award maintenance for the children......
Judgment:

Chamier, J.

1. Musammat Mahaginia applied to the Joint Magistrate of Allahabad, under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for an order directing one Ram Charan to provide for the maintenance of her child aged three years and also for a child about to be born, alleging that Ram Charan was their father. Mahaginia has since been delivered of a second child. The Joint Magistrate rejected her petition. She then applied to the District Magistrate who examined several more witnesses and has sent the case to this Court with a recommendation that the finding of the Joint. Magistrate be reversed and that Mahaginia be awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs. 3 per mensem for her two children against Ram Charan. The District Magistrate's recommendation cannot be accepted in its entirety; for it appears to me that he had no power to take evidence Under, Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure, and if he had power to take evidence it was only for the purpose of a recommendation to this Court and I cannot upon it proceed to award maintenance for the children. But it is quite clear that more evidence might and ought to have been produced before the Joint Magistrate, and the proceedings of the District Magistrate afford more than sufficient justification for an order for a further inquiry. I set aside the order of the Joint Magistrate and direct that the case be reheard by him.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //