Bombay High Court
Shaikh Akhil Shaikh Mohammad vs Reshma @ Parvin Akhil Shaikh And ... on 16 December, 2016
Bench: Z.A. Haq
(1) crirev165.15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 165 OF 2015
Shaikh Akhil Shaikh Mohammad ..Applicant
Age. 30 years, Occ. Tailor,
R/o. Jakhmatwadi, Tq. Gangapur,
Dist. Aurangabad.
Versus
1. Reshma @ Parvin w/o. Akhil Shaikh
ig ..Non-applicants
Age. 26 years, Occ. Household,
R/o. C/o. Niroddin Shaikh (Qureshi
Abdul Qavi Abdul Quader) House
No.1-14-117, Near Jaisingh Pura,
Arab Khidki, Aurangabad.
2. Shifa d/o. Akhil Sheikh,
Age. 6 years, Occ. Education,
R/o. As above.
3. Sharukh s/o. Akhil Shaikh,
Age. 4 years, Occ. Education,
R/o. As above.
[Respondent Nos.2 & 3 being minor
under guardianship of Respondent No.1]
4. The State of Maharashtra
Mr.Patel Khizer, Advocate for the applicants.
Mr.M.L. Wankhede, Advocate for non-applicant Nos.1 to 3.
Mr.G.O. Wattamwar, A.P.P. for the non-applicant/State.
CORAM : Z.A. HAQ,J.
DATED : 16.12.2016
(2) crirev165.15
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
. Heard.
02. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
03. The applicant has challenged the judgment passed
by the Family Court directing him to pay Rs.1000/- per
month to non-applicant No.1 and Rs.1500/- per month each
to non-applicant Nos.2 & 3 towards maintenance. The
judgment is passed after proceeding ex-parte against the
applicant. The case of the applicant is that initially
he attended the proceedings, however, in November, 2014
he has tested +ve for HIV and it was detected that
reactive result indicates presence of antibodies/antigen
to HIV virus. In support of the submission the applicant
has placed on record copy of the report of Pathology
Laboratory. The case of the applicant is that because of
the disease which was detected, the applicant could not
attend the proceedings and the Court proceeded ex-parte.
Non-applicant Nos.1 to 3 have not disputed the contention
of the applicant. The learned Advocate for the applicant,
on instructions, has further submitted that to show bona
fides, the applicant will continue to pay Rs.3000/- per
month to non-applicant No.1 towards maintenance for non-
applicant Nos.1 to 3 till the matter is disposed by the
(3) crirev165.15
Family Court.
04. Considering the above facts and the fairness
shown by the applicant, in my view the following order
would sub serve the ends of justice.
(i) The impugned judgment is set aside.
(ii) The matter is remitted to the Family
Court, Aurangabad, for fresh trial. The Family
Court shall permit the parties to place on
record documents and to lead evidence.
(iii) The applicant and the non-applicant
Nos.1 to 3 shall appear before the Family Court,
Aurangabad on 27.01.2017 and abide by the
further orders in the matter. As the matter is
old and considering the facts of the case, it
would be appropriate that the Family Court
disposes the matter within six months.
(iv) This order is passed on the assurance
given by the applicant that he will regularly
pay Rs.3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) per month
to non-applicant Nos.1 to 3 towards maintenance.
If the applicant fails to pay this amount, the
(4) crirev165.15
Family Court may pass appropriate orders against
the applicant, according to law.
(v) Rule made absolute in above terms. In
the circumstances, parties to bear their own
costs.
ig [Z.A. HAQ,J.]
snk/2016/DEC16/crirev165.15
