JUDGMENT S.R. Bhargava, J. - This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.2.87 passed by Magistrate granting maintenance of Rs. 100/- per month to the wife against her husband under Section 125, Cr.P.C. 2. Application for maintenance was filed by the wife Sharda Devi in 1981 with the allegation that She was married to re-appraise the Amarjeet Yadav one year ago, who lived with him for 1 months and then She went to her parents. Her husband neglected her and did not bring her to his house. When She went to her husband's house, She was not allowed to stay with her husband and was returnee with her father. She further alleged that she is unable to maintain herself while the husband has monthly income of Rs. 8000/- to 9000/-. 3. This application was resisted by the husband who denied marriage of Sharda Devi with him and alleged that Prabhawati Devi was his wife. He attributed misconduct to Sharda Devi. Parties adduced evidence. Learned Magistrate accepted evidence of marriage of Sharda Devi with revisionist Amarjeet Yadav. He accepted the case of desecration and neglect and awarded maintenance of Rs. 100/- per month as stated earlier. 4. Against this, Amarjeet Yadav has come to this Court. In this Court the only point urged, on behalf of the revisionist was that marriage of Sharda Devi, according to the evidence of Sharda Devi herself took place in the life time of Prabhawati Devi the admitted first wife of Amarjeet Yadav. As held in the case of Smt. Yamunabai Anantrao Adhav v. Ananrao Shivram Adhav and another, A.I.R. 1988 S.C. 644, marriage with person having living spouse was held to be null and void. It was vehemently contended, on behalf of Amarjeet that at any rate marriage of Sharda Devi with Amarjeet was nullity. She cannot be called wife and hence under section 125 Cr. P.C. only wife can claim maintenance. Sharda Devi is not entitled to maintenance. 5. On behalf of Sharda Devi, learned Counsel urged that the ground of nullity of the marriage as raised in this Court was not raised in the written reply of Amarjeet. Hence it cannot be considered. It should not be overlooked that proceedings under section 125 Cr. P.C. are held in the courts of the Magistrates where the legal skill available is not skilled in law of the pleadings. Hence it cannot be considered. It should not be overlooked that proceedings under section 125 Cr. P.C. are held in the courts of the Magistrates where the legal skill available is not skilled in law of the pleadings. To my mind principles and law of pleadings cannot be applied to proceedings under section 125 Cr. P.C. If there is sufficient material to prove that marriage of Sharda Devi with Amarjeet took place in the life time of the first wife Prabhawati Devi, it should be treated nullity and the claim for maintenance should fall 6. Learned Counsel for Sharda Devi pointed out that the learned Magistrate has recorded finding of fact that the marriage of Sharda Devi with Amarjeet took place after about 4 years of death of Prabhawati Devi. It was vehemently urged by the learned Counsel for Sharda Devi that this is a finding of fact which cannot be reversed in revision. The learned Counselor Amarjeet has not only referred to the Statement of Amarjeet recorded in 1987 that his first wife died about one year ago. He has further referred to witness Rampati P.W.5 examined by Sharda Devi. His statement was also recorded in 1987. In his cross examination, he said that Sharda Devi is aged 16 or 17 years. Amarjeet has two daughters one of whom is 5 or 6 years old and the other is 2 or 3 years old. It was then argued by learned Counsel for Amarjeet that it is not the case of Sharda Devi that she lived with Amerjeet and was blessed with daughter or daughters. Reference of daughters admitted by Rampati P.W. 5 is obviously to the daughters born from Prabhawati Devi. Learned Counsel for Amarjeet argued that Prabhawati Devi definitely died after the marriage of Sharda Devi with Amarjeet. 7. Question whether Sharda Devi was married with Amarjeet in the life time of his first wife Prabhawati Devi is a question of fact. Findings recorded by the Magistrate on this question cannot be reversed. But when the findings are vitiated by non-consideration of Material evidence of Rampati P.W.5, it has to be said that the finding recorded by the Magistrate is illegal. 8. In result this revision has to be allowed and the case has to be remanded back to the Magistrate for fresh disposal. But when the findings are vitiated by non-consideration of Material evidence of Rampati P.W.5, it has to be said that the finding recorded by the Magistrate is illegal. 8. In result this revision has to be allowed and the case has to be remanded back to the Magistrate for fresh disposal. The Magistrate shall specifically decide the question whether the marriage of Sharda devi took place in the life time of Prabhawati Devi the first wife of Amarjeet Yadav. In deciding revision afresh the learned Magistrate shall be at liberty to allow such interim maintenance to Sharda Devi as it deems fit.