Criminal Revision Application No. 302 of 2024 · Supreme Court · 2026

-1- REVN-302-2024IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADCRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.302 OF 2024Nissar Shaikh S/o. Rajjak Shaikh, Age : 48 years, Occu. : Labour, R/o. Degloor, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded.… Applicant(Orig. Respondent)Versus 1.Fatima Almara W/o. Nissar Shaikh, Age : 38 years, Occu. : Household, R/o. C/o. Dhilkhas bi Shashuddin, Pin No. 292, Kabas Nagar, Aurangabad.2.Daniyal S/o. Nisar Shaikh, Age : 9 years, Occu. : Education,R/o. C/o. Dhilkhasbi Shashuddin, Pin No.292, Kabas Nagar, Aurangabad.… Respondent(Orig. Petitioners)……Mr. Adil Biyabani, Advocate for Revision Applicant/Petitioner.Mr. Mudassir H. Shaikh h/f. Mr. Imtiyaz I. Pathan, Advocate forRespondents....… CORAM :ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.RESERVED ON :20 JANUARY 2026PRONOUNCED ON :22 JANUARY 2026ORDER :1.Revision petitioner - husband takes an exception to thejudgment and order dated 26.07.2024 passed by learned Family Court, Aurangabad in Petition No. E-5 of 2019 by which present revisionpetitioner is directed to pay maintenance to the tune of Rs.5,000/- permonth to wife and son. -2- REVN-302-20242.Learned counsel for revision petitioner would point out that, wife left the company of husband on her own accord. That, moreovershe was residing at Degloor, however, she instituted proceeding beforethe court of Family Court, Aurangabad, therefore he raises dispute aboutthe maintainability of very petition before the Family Court, Aurangabad.He further pointed out that, subsequently, petitioner has performedsecond marriage, but as second wife also left, he performed thirdmarriage. He has children from the said marriage to take care of, apartfrom maintaining his old aged mother as well as differently abled sister. That, though wife claimed that husband earned by conducting businessof selling milk packets, before the Family Court she did not adduce anylegally acceptable evidence. Learned counsel took this court through hisown deposition and also further pointed out that, several proceedings areinstituted by invoking several jurisdiction like Domestic Violence Act. Therefore, according to him, for above reasons, revision deserves to beallowed by setting aside the impugned order.3.Learned counsel for respondents supports the findings andconclusion drawn by learned Family Court.4.Heard. At the threshold, the issue of jurisdiction of FamilyCourt, Aurangabad to entertain the proceedings instituted by wife, being -3- REVN-302-2024raised, is required to be dealt at the outset. According to husband, FamilyCourt, Aurangabad had no jurisdiction as marriage between revisionpetitioner and respondent no.1 had taken place at Degloor. Secondly, entire family of wife also resides at Degloor. Therefore, there was noreason to institute above proceedings in the Family Court, Aurangabadon the ground of temporary stay. He pointed out that, moreover, there isno medical evidence in support of alleged treatment of son atAurangabad.5.Section 126 of Cr.P.C. deals with territorial jurisdiction ofcourt to decide proceedings under section 125 of Cr.P.C., which reads asunder :-“Section 126 - Procedure(1) Proceedings under section 125 may be taken against anyperson in any district.—(a) where he is, or(b) where he or his wife resides, or (c) where he last resided with his wife, or as the casemay be, with the mother of the illegitimate child.(2) All evidence to such proceedings shall be taken in thepresence of the person against whom an order for payment ofmaintenance is proposed to be made, or, when his personal attendanceis dispensed with in the presence of his pleader, and shall be recordedin the manner prescribed for summons-cases:Provided that if the Magistrate is satisfied that the personagainst whom an order for payment of maintenance is proposed to be -4- REVN-302-2024made is wilfully avoiding service, or wilfully neglecting to attend theCourt, the Magistrate may proceed to hear and determine the case exparte and any order so made may be set aside for good cause shown onan application made within three months from the date thereof subjectto such terms including terms as to payment of costs to the oppositeparty as the Magistrate may think just and proper.(3) The Court in dealing with applications under section 125shall have power to make such order as to costs as may be just.”6.In the light of above provision, it is abundantly clear thatsection 126(1) of Cr.P.C. does not contemplate permanent place ofresidence and therefore it cannot be said that proceedings are necessaryto be issued only from registered permanent address. Here, wife hascategorically stated that, she had shifted to her brother’s place atAurangabad and providing treatment to her ailing son. In the light of hersuch change of address and shifting, though temporarily, she has right toinstitute proceedings at the Family Court, Aurangabad by virtue of herstay with her brother. For above reasons, entertainment of herapplication by Family Court, Aurangabad cannot be faulted at.7.As regards to second point is concerned, though there is nolegally acceptable evidence in support of the income and that revisionpetitioner having married multiple times subsequently and he haschildren from such marriages, apart from his duty to maintain his old -5- REVN-302-2024aged mother as well as differently abled sister, his submission before thiscourt, on court query, that he along with his nephew is involved in thebusiness of real estate and taking the same into account coupled with theevidence adduced by wife in trial court, the quantum of Rs.5,000/- permonth each to the respondent and their son, cannot be said to beunjustified or excess. As no point made out on merits showing any patentperversity and illegality in the impugned order, this court in its revisionaljurisdiction refrains itself from interfering. Hence, the following order ispassed :ORDERThe Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. (ABHAY S. WAGHWASE, J.) Tandale