Bombay High Court
Shaheen Parveen Mohammad Shakeel And 3 ... vs Abdul Rehman Sheikh Karim And 8 Others on 13 February, 2025
2025:BHC-NAG:1688
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
(1)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.265 OF 2023
1) Shaheen Parveen Mohammad Shakeel,
Aged about - 30 years,
Occupation : Household,
2) Mohammad Hussain Mohd Shakeel,
Aged about - 12 years,
3) Mohammad Danish Mohammad Shakeel,
Aged about - 10 years,
4) Mohammad Abujaan Mohd Shakeel,
Aged about - 06 years,
Applicant No. 2 to 4 appearing through
Applicant No.1.
All Resident of Tanga Chowk, Juni
Vasti, Murtizapur, District Akola. ..... APPLICANTS
// VERSUS //
1. Abdul Rehman Sheikh Karim,
Aged about - 83 years, Occupation-Nil,
2. Sheikh Jameel Abdul Rehman,
Aged about 48 years,
Occupation : Labourer,
3. Mohammad Akeel Abdul Rehman,
Aged about - 41 years,
Occupation : Labourer,
4. Mohammad Zakeer Abdul Rehman,
Aged about - 40 years,
Occupation : Labourer,
5. Abdul Rajik Abdul Rehman,
Aged about - 38 years,
Occupation : Labourer,
6. Mohammad Sadik Abdul Rehman
Aged about - 36 years,
Occupation : Labourer,
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
(2)
7. Saleha Mohammad Akeel,
Aged about - 35 years,
Occupation : Household.
All Resident of Kommapura,
Tehsil - Anjangaon Surji,
District Amravati.
8. Mohammad Shakeel Abdul Rehmanm
Aged about - 48 years,
Occupation : Labourer,
R/o.Kommapura, Tehsil- Anjangaon Surji,
District - Amravati,
9. State of Maharashtra
Through Police Station Murtizapur,
District Akola. .... NON-APPLICANTS
----------------------------------------
Ms. S. H. Bhatia, appointed Counsel for the applicants.
Mr. Asifuddin S. Siddiqui, Counsel for non-applicant Nos.2
to 8.
Ms. Swati Kolhe, APP for the non-applicant No.9 /State.
----------------------------------------
CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.
DATED : 13.02.2025
ORAL JUDGMENT :
1. Admit.
2. Heard finally with the consent of learned Counsel
appearing for the parties.
3. By this revision application, the applicant No.1, who is
the original applicant - wife of Mohammad Shakeel challenges the
order dated 05.06.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Akola in Criminal Appeal No.1/2023, remanding the matter
back to the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class for further
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
considerations and directing the appellants therein to deposit the
amount of Rs.1,000/- towards the expenses of the litigation.
4. The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of
the revision which are as under:
The applicant No.1 and original non-applicant No.1 are
husband and wife and other non-applicants are family members.
The marriage between them was solemnized on 04.06.2008,
thereafter, there was some discord between them, as it is alleged
that the original non-applicant No.1 has ill-treated the present
applicant No.1 for the demand of money and treated with cruelty,
physically as well as mentally. The applicant No.1 has lodged the
report at Anjangaon Surji and Murtizapur against the original
non-applicant No.1 and his relatives. On the basis of the same, the
crime was registered against them. As the original non-applicant
No.1 has not provided any maintenance or not made any provision
for maintenance for the applicant No.1 and her children. She
preferred an application for grant of maintenance and other
protections. The applicants claimed the maintenance
@ Rs.30,000/- and Rs.7,00,000/- as a compensation.
5. The said application is strongly opposed by the husband
and his relatives. After considering the entire evidence on record,
the learned Magistrate allowed the application and granted
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
maintenance @ Rs.10,500/- towards the maintenance as well as
rent towards the house.
6. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the
original non-applicant Nos.2 to 8 preferred the Criminal Appeal on
the ground that no sufficient opportunity was granted to them to
adduce the evidence and behind their back, the order was passed
and claimed the remand of the matter. The Additional Sessions
Judge, Akola, considered the said contention, and after hearing both
sides, allowed the appeal partly and remanded back the matter to
the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Murtizapur for reconsideration,
after giving an opportunity to the appellants therein. It is further
directed by the Additional Sessions Judge that the appellants shall
pay Rs.1,000/- towards the expenses to the respondent Nos.1 to 4
in appeal. The order passed in Criminal Application No.103/2017 by
the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Murtizapur against
the original non-applicant Nos.2 to 8 is quashed and set aside and
the matter is remanded back to the learned Judicial Magistrate First
Class, Court No1, Murtizapur. It was further directed that the
original non-applicant Nos.2 to 8 are permitted to cross-examine
the applicant therein and also permitted to adduce the evidence.
7. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said Judgment
and order, the present revision application is preferred by the
original applicant No.1 on the ground that the learned Additional
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
Sessions Judge has not considered that the applicant No.1 has no
sufficient means for her maintenance. After due notice, the original
non-applicants failed to appear and therefore, the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class proceeded to dispose of the matter. It is
further submitted that as the original non-applicant Nos.2 to 8 were
not diligent, and therefore, the ex parte order was passed against
them, therefore, there was no ground for the learned Additional
Sessions Judge to consider the ground to remand the matter.
Moreover, the original non-applicant No.1 has not paid any amount
towards the maintenance, which is granted by the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class. The original non-applicant No.1 husband has
not challenged the said order, therefore, the said order is still
maintained against the husband and it is not set aside against the
husband. The total arrears of the maintenance are Rs.12,12,000/-
and he has paid only Rs.1,05,000/- towards the said maintenance.
Considering the conduct of the original non-applicant No.1 -
husband, the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge
remanding back the matter is erroneous, illegal and liable to be set
aside.
8. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants as well as for
the non-applicant Nos.2 to 8. Perused the impugned Judgment i.e.
Judgment of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class as well as
the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola. On perusal of both
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
Judgments, it reveals that admittedly the notice was served upon
all the original non-applicants, but as they remained absent and
therefore, the ex parte order was passed. The Additional Sessions
Judge has considered that in the interest of natural justice, the
opportunity is to be granted to the original non-applicant Nos.2 to 8
to contest the application, and therefore, the said appeal was
allowed to the extent that the matter be remanded back to the trial
Court and an opportunity be granted to the original non-applicant
Nos.2 to 8 to cross-examine the witnesses and contest the
application. Thus, as far as the order regarding remanding of the
matter by giving an opportunity to the original non-applicant Nos.2
to 8 is concerned, which is legal and proper, and in the interest of
justice. As far as the contention of the learned Counsel for the
applicants that original non-applicant No.1, who has not challenged
the said order against whom the order passed by the learned
Magistrate is still in existence, has not deposited any amount
towards the maintenance, it requires to be considered. Admittedly,
the original non-applicant No.1 has only deposited Rs.1,05,000/-
against the arrears of Rs.12,12,000/- therefore, the original non-
applicant No.1 - husband has to deposit 50% of the arrears of the
amount within six weeks.
9. In view of the above observations, the order passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge as far as remanding the
35.revn.265.2023.Judgment.odt
matter back to the trial Court is concerned, requires to be
maintained. At the same time, direction is required to be given to
the original non-applicant No.1 to deposit 50% of the total arrears
of the amount within six weeks. In view of that, I proceed to pass
following order:
ORDER
(i) Criminal Revision Application is partly allowed.
(ii) The order passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Akola, remanding the matter to the trial Court is
hereby maintained.
(iii) The original non-applicant No.1 - husband shall pay the
50% arrears against the total arrears of the maintenance
amount within six weeks.
(iv) The parties to appear before the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Court No.1, Murtizapur on
10.03.2025.
10. The revision application is disposed of.
11. The fees of the appointed Counsel be quantified as per
rules.
(URMIL A JOSHI-PHALKE, J.)
Sarkate.
Signed by: Mr. A.R. Sarkate
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 20/02/2025 18:52:26
