JUDGMENT S.C. Jain, J.
1. Smt. Meena, respondent No. 4, alleging herself to be a legally wedded wife of the petitioner, filed a petition for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in the Court of VII Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.
2. The husband, Anand Prakash Gupta, raised preliminary objections regarding the jurisdiction of the Courts at Varanasi to entertain that petition. It was alleged that case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. could be initiated either at the place the wife resides or at the place where she last resided with her husband. It was alleged that at the time when that application was moved she was residing in village Saidupur, Police Station Chakia, district Varanasi. Munsif Magistrate Chakia has been empowered to deal with the cases under Section 125 Cr.P.C. of Police Station Chakia under Section 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
3. The learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate before whom that petition was moved ordered that the Chief Judicial Magistrate may be moved for transfer of the case. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after going through the record and the affidavit filed by the parties observed that on that date she was residing in Mohalla Khajuri alongwith her Mausi within the jurisdiction of Varanasi Courts and, therefore, he ordered that the matter could be heard at Varanasi itself. It is that order of the Courts below which have been challenged in this writ petition.
4. Section 126(1) Cr.P.C. lays down the jurisdiction of the Court where petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. can be moved. A bare reading of this section shows that the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. can be filed by aggrieved person in any district where he or she resides or where he or she last resided together. Police Station Chakia as well as Police Station Ram Nagar fall within the district of Varanasi. Her filing petition at Varanasi and not filing the same at Chakia where she was earlier residing does not make any difference. It is for the administrative convenience that in a district powers have been conferred upon various Judicial Magistrates in respect of various Police Stations, but a Magistrate is not debarred under the law for passing any order or for entertaining any case of any other Police Station of the district. It may be a violation of administrative instructions and orders and not a violation of legal provisions and the violation of administrative instructions does not make an order illegal. The Chief Judicial Magistrate in the district can assign any case to any of the Magistrate under his control in that district. Even in this case the order has been passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate allowing retention of this case by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate at Varanasi and that order cannot be said to be illegal. Even otherwise if a Magistrate having no territorial jurisdiction entertains a case and passes an order that order does not become illegal. It can be said that irregularity has been committed by the Magistrate but it cannot be said he has committed any illegality. The word 'district' has been specifically used under Section 126(1) Cr.P.C.
5. I find no ground to interfere in writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which is an extraordinary remedy. In view of my above discussions, this writ petition is dismissed with the observations that the Trial Court should expedite disposal of the maintenance petition which has already taken considerably long time in deciding the question of territorial jurisdiction. The parties are directed to appear before the Court concerned at Varanasi on 16.8.1995. The stay order dated 19.9.1994 is vacated.
A copy of this order be sent to the Court concerned immediately.