Short Note : 1. The non-applicant wife had filed an application for maintenance against the applicant husband under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of maintenance allowance for herself as well as for her two minor daughters. 2. Held; Both the Courts below have held that the applicant failed to prove that the non-applicant was living in adultery. Apart from the physical cruelty to the non-applicant the learned Session Judge was of the view that the applicant having admittedly made allegations of adultery against the non-applicant, the said conduct amounted to have' caused a mental cruelty to the non-applicant. In the opinion of this Court, the approach of the lower Court does not seem to be erroneous. Moreover in view of the allegations of the applicant about the unchastity of the non-applicant, her testimony that she was beaten by the applicant and was left at her parents house, must be believed. The evidence of the non-applicant is corroborated by Babulal (P.W. 5) who was next door neighbour of the applicant. He has deposed that the non-applicant had once come to his house and had• made complaint that she was beaten by her husband At that time this witness had seen certain injuries on the person of the non-applicant. It is not disputed that since the time the non-applicant left the home of the applicant he did not take care to maintain her. Therefore, the finding of the lower Court that applicant failed or refused to maintain the respondent, cannot be disturbed in revision. Revision partly allowed.