ASISH BARAN MUKHERJEE, J. ( 1 ) THE revisional application arises out of an order by the Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Tamluk dated 28-8-95 passed in connection with Misc. Case No. 273 of 1993 arising out of an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. started at the instance of the present O. P. ( 2 ) THE allegation contained in the application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. in short is as follows :- The present petitioner married the O. P. on 16th of May, 1982 according to Mohammedan Rites. After solemnization of marriage, he used to stay in the matrimonial home but after a lapse of about one year the husband and inmates of the matrimonial home started to inflict torture on the wife whose maintenance was also neglected. Efforts were made to settle the dispute amicably but failed. On 8th May, 1993, the father-in-law and his wife along with some other relations instigated the husband and the latter demanded a sum of Rs. 20,000/- from the father of the wife. As the demand was not met, attempt was made to assault the wife with a knife. In course of which he received injuries. Therefore, the wife left the matrimonial home. The husband did not enquire about her maintenance and there was no attempt to take her back. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to the wife, the husband draws the salary of Rs. 5,000 per month being clerk cum Cashier of a Bank and also is the owner of a building and 10 bighas of paddy lands. As she has got no income of her own she filed an application under Section 125, Cr. P. C. for a monthly maintenance of Rs. 1500/ -. ( 4 ) THE husband contested the application and in course of the show cause denied material allegations. According to him, the marriage was solemnized on 14-5-82 and it was registered before the Kuazi at Panskura on 16-5-82. After marriage the couple started to reside at Champadali. After about 2 years they had to go to Calcutta when the husband used to work at the instance of the wife since she could not put up with relations of the husband. From there, they went to Kolaghat and again they shifted to the ancestral home at Champadali. After marriage the couple started to reside at Champadali. After about 2 years they had to go to Calcutta when the husband used to work at the instance of the wife since she could not put up with relations of the husband. From there, they went to Kolaghat and again they shifted to the ancestral home at Champadali. They had to take a rented house under Banskura P. S. as the wife failed to adjust herself with other members. Subsequently, a building was constructed after the husband obtained the loan from the Bank but even then there was no peace but there were frequent quarrels between the parties. The husband has alleged that owing to higher social and academic status of the wife she could not adjust herself to the members of husband's family. The wife as per the husband was brought up at Bokaro Steel City and one of her brothers is a Mining Engineer and the other a Doctor. It is alleged that the wife suddenly left the matrimonial home voluntarily with all her ornaments and belongings, abandoning her sons on 8-5-93 and started to reside with her father's family. Having no way out, the husband pronounced three talaqs in presence of witnesses on 9-7-93 which was later registered on 10-7-93 before the Kauzi, Panskura. The husband also sent several letters communicating the fact of talaq to the wife by registered post but they came back with the endorsement "left, Not found, Address not known". On 5-9-93 the husband also sent two persons to the wife in order to inform her about the Talaq but they were threatened by the inmates who demanded Rs. 2 Lacs. The sum was not paid and accordingly, a criminal case was started at the instance of the wife resulting in arrest of the husband, his parents and sisters. Regarding the income, the husband's case is that his gross salary is Rs. 4500/- but he gets around Rs. 2300/- per month after all deductions. He is also required to maintain his two sons and parents. ( 5 ) THE Ld. Judicial Magistrate, on the basis of witnesses adduced by the parties came to the conclusion that the factum of talaq was not proved, that the same was not communicated and as such he allowed the prayer under Section 125, Cr. P. C. and awards a monthly maintenance of Rs. ( 5 ) THE Ld. Judicial Magistrate, on the basis of witnesses adduced by the parties came to the conclusion that the factum of talaq was not proved, that the same was not communicated and as such he allowed the prayer under Section 125, Cr. P. C. and awards a monthly maintenance of Rs. 1200/- to the wife payable from the date of filing of the petition. ( 6 ) BEING aggrieved the present revisional application has been filed alleging that story of talaq ought to have been believed, that with the pronouncement of talaq the marriage came to an end and that the order of the Learned Judicial Magistrate should be set aside. ( 7 ) THE Ld. Advocate appearing for the petitioner has relied on Sections 279 and 308 of Mohammedan Law by Mollah in support of his contention that no reason need be assigned by a Muslim husband for giving talaq to the wife. It has further been argued that a divorced muslim woman is eligible to maintenance during the period of Iddatue and in case the talaq is not communicated to her until after the expiry of that period, she is entitled to maintenance until she is informed of the divorce. Reliance has also been placed on the talaqnama, zerox copy of which has been filed. It has been argued that with the introduction of the Muslim Women (Protection of' Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986, Section 125 has no application with regard to maintenance at the instance of a Muslim wife but she is to get the same in accordance with the provisions contained in the said Act. It has also been argued that in course of the show cause petition the husband asserted the factum of talaq and in course of the evidence the wife admitted that she could be aware of the talaq on perusal of the show cause. It is submitted the show cause application was filed on 3-11-93 and as such she can claim maintenance in accordance with the Muslim Law for a period from the date of talaq to the communication even if the earlier communication is not accepted. In support of the contention; reliance has been placed on a case reported in AIR 1933 Calcutta 27. In support of the contention; reliance has been placed on a case reported in AIR 1933 Calcutta 27. ( 8 ) ON behalf of the O. P. it has been argued that name of the wife has not been noted in the appropriate column of the talaqnama and as such the talaq is not in accordance with law since it was not admittedly given in the presence of the wife. It has also been argued that there was no proper communication of the alleged talaq. Reliance has been placed on some cases dealing on the aspect of communication. apart from the case reported in 1994 Calcutta Criminal Law Reporter 48. ( 9 ) I have given my careful consideration to the submissions of the Ld. Advocates of both the sides. I have also scrutinised the decisions on this point referred to by the Ld. Advocates of both the sides. Marriage, in accordance with the Muslim Law is to some extent unique in the sense that it is not a sacrament but it is a contract entered into between a man and a woman with the object of procreation and legalisation of children. The Muslim Law gives unfettered discretion on a Muslim husband to put an end to the marriage tie by resorting to talaq of different types recognised by the Muslim Law. It is not necessary for our purpose to deal with all the different forms but we may keep ourselves confined to the particular form of talak which is alleged to have been given in this namely, talaq-UI-Bidaat which is commonly known as talak-i-bayen and has been pronounced as such by the husband and his witnesses during trial. This form of talaq becomes irrevocable immediately it is pronounced. As soon as this pronouncement is made the marriage tie comes to an end but if it is not done in the presence of the wife then she is entitled to maintenance in accordance with the Muslim Law, so long it is not communicated. ( 10 ) IN the present case the story of talaq as given by the husband has been supported by two other witnesses apart from husband's father and if a careful scrutiny is made there can be any reason to disbelieve the factum of talaq. The talaq so given appears to have been registered and in the registered talaqnama we get the name of the wife even. The talaq so given appears to have been registered and in the registered talaqnama we get the name of the wife even. It is true that as per the evidence of the kuazi he put a wrong date which was subsequently corrected by him without giving any initial but that does not invalidate the story of talaq. There cannot be any reason to disbelieve the story of talaq as the witnesses on this point have stood the test of cross-examination. It is however true that there is some dispute about the mode of communication. While husband wanted to say that it was communicated the day after talaq, the evidence of the witnesses communicating the same is otherwise. It is also true, that the question of communication by registered post has got no legal value having regard to the endorsements made by the postal employee on the envelope. Such endorsement does not amount to acceptance but it cannot be gain said that in course of the show cause made by the husband on 3-11-93 before the trial Court, the story of talaq was pleaded in un-equivocal terms. Therefore, this averment of the show cause coupled with the evidence given by the wife on this point clearly reveals that on the said date the wife become aware of the fact of talaq. Therefore, under the Muslim Law, she can claim maintenance only for the period from the date of divorce to the date of communication as stated above. ( 11 ) IT is true that the unilateral power of divorce which a Muslim husband possesses may appear to be inconsistent with the thinking of the present day. But so long the Muslim Law is not codified in consonance with the aspiration and necessity of the present day, the Court is to administer the law as it is enshrined in the Koran. ( 12 ) WITH the introduction of the Muslim Woman (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986 which came into force on 19-5-86 the law on this point has become more stringent so far as the Muslim women is concerned. In view of Section (sic) and Section 7 of the said Act, Section 125 to Section 127 of the Cr. P. C. so far as they relate to the Muslim women comes to an end. In view of Section (sic) and Section 7 of the said Act, Section 125 to Section 127 of the Cr. P. C. so far as they relate to the Muslim women comes to an end. The remedy for such a person is to resort to Section 3 of the said Act in order to get a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance for the period mentioned therein. Accordingly, the Ld. Magistrate's order cannot stand. In the result the order of maintenance dated 28-8-95 passed by Ld. J. M. 3rd Court, Tamluk in Misc. Case 273 of 1993 is set aside. The Ld. Magistrate is directed to dispose of the prayer for maintenance in accordance with the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act of 1986. Such decision is to be made within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the order. The revisional application is accordingly disposed of. Let the Ld. Magistrate be informed accordingly. Order accordingly.