Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sahanawaz Tarafdar vs Unknown on 15 March, 2021
BR 15.3.
13 2021
CRR 1449 of 2020
In the matter of :Sahanawaz Tarafdar
.... Petitioner
Mr. Sunny Nandy ... for the petitioner
Ms. Soni Ojha,
Mr. Ganesh Manna ..... for the O.P. No.2
The husband /appellant in criminal appeal
no. 55 of 2018 is the petitioner in the instant
revision . The instant revision is filed challenging
legality, validity and propriety of the judgment
and order dated 25th September, 2020 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge,Fast Track
1st Court, Barasat, North 24-Parganas in criminal
appeal no. 55 of 2018.
Be it mentioned here, the said appeal was
filed challenging an order of interim monetary
relief granted in favour of the opposite party no.
2 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Barasat in C- Case No. 1155 of 2016 dated 3 rd
September, 2018.
Learned Judge in the lower appellate Court
dismissed the appeal on contest affirming the
judgment and order passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Barasat in the
abovementioned C-case No. 1155 of 2016.
The bone of contention as raised in the
instant revision is that the petitioner divorced
the opposite party no. 2 under Mohammaden
rites and customs. Within one year her divorce
she married another person, namely, Rejaul Ali
and she has been residing with him. The
petitioner has raised question as to whether the
opposite party no. 2 is entitled to get monetary
relief under Section 23 of the said Act in view of
her re-marriage with another person. In support
of his contention, the petitioner has filed a
certificate issued by the local gram panchayat
member and some copes of police reports where
the opposite party no. 2 has been stated as the
wife of the said Rejaul Ali.
By filing an affidavit -in-opposition the
opposite party no. 2 has specifically denied her
alleged second marriage after divorce by her
husband. It is submitted by the learned advocate
for the opposite party no. 2 that a certificate
issued by a member of local gram panchayat or
police report are not proves of marriage between
the opposite party no. 2 and one Rejaul Ali.
The petitioner has filed affidavit in reply
reiterating the same fact of marriage of the
opposite party no. 2 with one Rejaul Ali for the
second time.
Having heard the learned counsels for the
parties and on careful perusal of entire record as
well as the documents filed by the parties at the
time of hearing it is ascertained that the issue
that is required to be adjudicated upon in the
proceeding under Section 12 of the said Act is as
to whether the petitioner divorced the opposite
party no. 2 or not and secondly whether after
divorce the opposite party no. 2 has married to
one Rejaul Ali. Grant or refusal of monetary relief
depends upon the decision of the issues referred
hereinbefore.
Therefore, the instant criminal revision is
disposed of directing both the parties to adduce
evidence before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Barasat and produce all the
documents in respect of them. The learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate is at liberty to even call the
said Rejaul Ali to give evidence as a Court
witness under Section 311 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure for proper adjudication of the
dispute. The learned trial Court is also under
obligation to dispose of the C-Case No. 1155 of
2016 keeping in mind the observations made by a
coordinate Bench of this Court in CRR No. 3104
of 2019.
The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Barasat is directed to conclude the evidence and
dispose of the case expeditiously and preferably
within eight weeks from date.
In the mean time the petitioner shall go on
paying the interim monetary relief payable for
maintenance of the daughter of the parties.
( Bibek Chaudhuri, J. )
