JUDGMENT The order dated 25th August, 2000 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Court at Sealdah, in Case No. M-27 of 1997 corresponding to T.R. No. 54 of 1998, Smt. Anushree Halder v. Sri Debnarayan Halder, falls for consideration before this Court. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order against the refusal by the learned Magistrate of his prayer for staying all further proceedings of M-27 of 1997 pending disposal of M.A.T. Suit No.1 of 2000 wherein an order of alimony pendente lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act was passed. This has prompted the petitioner to move this Court by way of revision. 3. The learned Lawyer appearing for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the fact that the wife-opposite party has received the alimony pendente lite granted by the Civil Court, not only the maintenance proceeding should remain stayed but any amount granted by this Court will have to be adjusted with the said amount. 4. The learned Lawyer appearing for the opposite party No.1 contradicts the submission made on behalf of the petitioner and opposes the prayer. 5. After considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties and going through the materials-on-record, I am unable to persuade myself to the reasoning of the argument made by the learned Lawyer of the petitioner. The proceeding under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code is an independent proceeding and cannot be neither nourished nor curtailed by any parallel civil proceeding. More so, when the learned Magistrate has not passed the final award, the question of adjustment at this stage also does not arise and such prayer is misconceived. I find that the learned Magistrate has rightly passed the impugned order which requires no interference by this revisional Court. Accordingly, I do not find any merit in the revisional application and the same is dismissed.