Debshankar Jha vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 3130 Cal

 D/L29                                C.R.R. No.464 of 2022
June 9,

In Re: An application under Section 482 read with Section 401 of the Bpg.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973;

Debshankar Jha Versus The State of West Bengal & Anr.

Mr. Md. Zeeshan Uddin, Ms. Amrin Khatoon.

...for the petitioner.

Mr. Satyam Mukherjee, Ms. Sayani Ahmed, Mr. Soumyadeep Mukherjee.

...for the opposite party no.2.

The petitioner before this Court has challenged the

judgment and order dated 29.11.2021 delivered by the learned

Sessions Judge, Birbhum, in Criminal Revision No.25 of 2019.

The petitioner, who happens to be the husband, is

aggrieved by the interim maintenance awarded to the wife by the

learned Sessions Judge, in spite of the same being refused by the

learned Magistrate who granted interim maintenance only to the

child and refused that of the wife.

Be that as it may, the records reflect that the subject

matter of challenge before this Court relates to interim

maintenance. The application under Section 125 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure was preferred in the year 2018. More than four

years have been expired in the meantime and the evidence before

the learned trial court is yet to commence. The purpose of interim

maintenance is for sustenance during the pendency of the

application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure and, as such, awarding maintenance by the

learned Sessions Judge does not suffer from any illegality.

Mr. Zeeshan Uddin, learned advocate appearing for the

petitioner submits that the learned Sessions Court ignored the

documents which were placed on record and the petitioner was

unrepresented on the date of final hearing took place.

Be that as it may, the conduct of the petitioner as such

before the learned revisional court was not proper. There are some

materials obviously which requires for consideration for a court of

law to arrive at its conclusion both regarding the entitlement of

maintenance as well as the quantum of maintenance to be awarded

as the materials in the form of evidence are to be brought on record.

In view of the aforesaid, I am of the considered opinion

that in case the documents which have been orally submitted before

this Court by the learned advocate for the petitioner is brought on

record in course of evidence, the learned Magistrate would

independently consider the issues of entitlement of maintenance as

well as the quantum of maintenance to be awarded at the time of

final disposal of the case without being influenced by any

observations made by this Court or the Sessions Court.

With the aforesaid observations, CRR 464 of 2022 is

disposed of.

Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of.

Interim order, if any, is hereby vacated.'

All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)