Binod Kumar Mishra vs Unknown
2024 Latest Caselaw 5145 Cal

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

Binod Kumar Mishra vs Unknown on 4 October, 2024

Author: Joymalya Bagchi

Bench: Joymalya Bagchi

04.10.2024
Item No. 2
SG
                          IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                         CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION


                                   C.R.R. No. 3487 of 2024


             In the matter of : Binod Kumar Mishra
                                                                  .....petitioner

                   Mrs. Dipanwita Ganguly
                                                        ....for the petitioner


             1.

Petitioner has assailed the judgment and order dated

18.03.2024 whereby the revisional Court set aside the order

passed by learned Judicial Magistrate refusing maintenance to

opposite party-wife and directed the learned Magistrate to

consider the issue afresh in light of documents filed by the

opposite party-wife to prove the marriage between herself and

the petitioner.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the documents,

that is, voters' list, identity card, photographs were belatedly

filed. On the other hand, criminal case had been lodged by one

Jahar Mishra alleging that the opposite party was his lawfully

married wife which proves that the marriage between the

petitioner and opposite party is a void one.

3. I have considered the materials on record. Opposite party

claimed that the marriage was solemnized between herself and

the petitioner on 10.02.1998. During her matrimonial life she

was subjected to cruelty and driven out of the matrimonial

home. In this backdrop, she prayed for maintenance from the

petitioner who is a school teacher as well as engaged in

business.

4. Petitioner contends opposite party was not his legally married

wife. He was married to one Chanda Pathok and a male child

was born from the wedlock. Evidence were led on behalf of the

parties and learned Magistrate after consideration of materials

on record rejected the plea for maintenance. During hearing of

the revision petition opposite party produced a voters' list,

petitioner's identity card and photographs which showed that

she was his married wife.

5. In this backdrop, the revisional Court remanded the matter for

fresh consideration and liberty was given to produce the

documents before Magistrate. In a maintenance proceeding wife

need not prove the marriage beyond reasonable doubt. In the

event she can prove the couple was residing as husband and

wife strict and legal proof of marriage is not necessary.

Documents produced in the revisional proceeding clearly show

that the opposite party was described as wife of the petitioner.

These are relevant pieces of evidence which require to be

considered by the learned Magistrate.

6. Under such circumstances, revisional Court was justified in

remanding the matter for fresh consideration in light of the

aforesaid documents by the learned Magistrate.

7. Accordingly, CRR 3487 of 2024 is disposed of.

(Joymalya Bagchi, J.)