A perusal of the impugned order and the record summoned from the lower court, shows that the applicant has acted in breach of the order dated 21.10.2003 passed by this Court in Criminal Misc. Application under Section No. 7221 of 2003, by failing to pay arrears of maintenance due under the maintenance order, passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and in enforcement of which recovery warrants dated 18.07.2003 were issued leading to his detention in prison, wherefrom he was relieved by an order of this Court dated 21.10.2003, on condition that he would pay all outstanding by then due (being a sum of Rs. 66,000/-) in six equal monthly installments, the first being payable on 06.01.2004. Now, a fresh warrant has been been issued for realization on 05.01.2004. He has made an application to stay those warrants, till disposal of his Application under Section 127 Cr.P.C., seeking to set aside the substantive order of maintenance. The aforesaid conduct of the revisionist is one that is unfair, not only to the opposite party but also to the Court, where he had been granted relief from confinement upon condition that he would pay arrears of maintenance, in monthly installments. Even otherwise, the applicant by failing to pay under an order of maintenance, on the one hand and on the other asking the Court to recall coercive process cannot be permitted to place premium of his own wrong; and, more so, at the cost of the other side, who are his wife and children unable to maintain themselves.
