JUDGMENT Cunliffe, J. - This Rule must be discharged. The Petitioner here by name Sailendra Nath Das, who is described as a clerk at Alipur, was the Respondent in a summons case under sec. 488, Cr. P. C, with reference to the maintenance of his wife and her infant child The history of the couple seems to have been that they were born Indian Christians, that they were both subsequently converted Into Hinduism and that this marriage, under which the application of the wife was made, was celebrated according to Hindu rites. The spouses became on bad terms and there was a previous summons on the part of the wife which was settled and it is said that at that settlement the Petitioner admitted the validity of this Hindu marriage. The attitude that he took before the learned Magistrate who dealt with the maintenance summons upon which this petition is based is that he suggested that the marriage, to use his own expression in the petition, is a fraud upon the Statute, and as such, cannot in law be recognised. I asked the learned Advocate what Statute the marriage was supposed to be a fraud upon and the answer was, Christian Marriage Act. He also now says that his wife is a prostitute and therefore he is not going to take her back. But the learned Magistrate did not look upon his resistance to this summons With any favour at all. He made an order in the wife's favour of a payment of Rs. 15 a month, being Rs. 10 for the wife and Rs. 5 for the maintenance of the infant. He seems to have been satisfied from the evidence that the parties were Hindu convert at the time of the marriage and that the marriage was celebrated with appropriate Hindu rites. 2. The argument addressed to us on behalf of the Petitioner has been in the main on the question of the validity of the marriage. It is contended that in law a marriage of this character cannot be celebrated and cannot be given legal effect to. There are various authorities cited to us in support of this proposition. 3. 2. The argument addressed to us on behalf of the Petitioner has been in the main on the question of the validity of the marriage. It is contended that in law a marriage of this character cannot be celebrated and cannot be given legal effect to. There are various authorities cited to us in support of this proposition. 3. On the other hand on behalf of the wife and on the part of the Deputy Legal Remembrances, who attended the Court as amicus cruise, we were invited to uphold the learned Magistrate's decision as he was merely giving effect to the section of the Code which gives proper and speedy relief in the circumstance, and that he ought not to be burdened and this court of criminal appeal ought not to be burdened with the decision of a point of personal civil law which could not possibly concern it 4. I am inclined to accede to that argument. It seems to me that if the Petitioner here wishes to impeach the validity of his marriage, he should bring a declaratory suit in a Civil Court when the whole question can be investigated and the authorities pros and con canvassed in this regard, We shall be, quite apart from the merits, very slow to accede to the Petitioner in this Rule. If we did so, the effect of this, of course, would be to bastardise the infant. We are not convinced that the Petitioner by his conduct is deserving of any sympathy from the Court. The Rule, therefore, is discharged and the order of the Magistrate with regard to the payment of the maintenance is upheld. Henderson, J. I agree.