9. The learned Judge ought to have appreciated the fact that the provisions of Section 125 is a measure of social justice and law must progress. It is needless to say that when the wife comes before the Court with a plea that she is entitled to get maintenance from her husband, before arriving at a finding whether she is entitled for maintenance or not, the Court must take genuine interest to find out the truth of the matter. Section 125 of Cr. P. C., as stated above, is a measure of social justice and specially enacted to protect woman, who is neglected by her husband, who is bound to maintain her and, therefore, while interpreting the said section out of two alternatives, one which advances the cause of derelicts must be preferred by the Court and not which frustrates its very purpose; The approach of the Courts while considering the plea of one who claims maintenance should be liberal and to that extent the provisions of Section 125 of Cr. P. C. must be liberally construed. It is only when the plea raised by one, who is alleged to be liable to pay the amount of maintenance is concerned, the case made out by him disputing the plea of the applicant, who claims maintenance, must be considered by adopting standard of strict proof. The ends of justice must be served and not frustrated by taking technical view. The learned Judge committed an error in holding that no independent witness has been examined by the wife in support of her evidence. Her evidence on oath, not shaken in cross-examination, was sufficient to award the maintenance. Therefore, the impugned order passed by the learned Judge rejecting the Revision Application of wife is required to be set aside.