Abdul Kalam vs Rejina Khatun
2022 Latest Caselaw 4229 Gua

                                                                  Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010165972022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./426/2022

              ABDUL KALAM
              S/O TAIZUDDIN
              R/O VILL- BHELLA,
              P.O. BHELLA
              P.S. AND DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM



              VERSUS

              REJINA KHATUN
              D/O TAHER ALI
              R/O VILL- GADHESHALIPAM
              MOUZA- SARUKHETRI, P.S. SARTHEBARI
              DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM



Advocate for the Petitioner   : DR. B AHMED

Advocate for the Respondent : MR R DAS




                                      BEFORE
                         HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN


                                          ORDER

02.11.2022.

Heard Mr. SR Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. Page No.# 2/4

DFA Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent.

This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 17.06.2022, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Barpeta, in F.C. (Crl.) Case No.135/2021, under Section 125 of the CrPC.

It is to be noted here that vide the impugned judgment and order, the learned Court below directed the petitioner to pay a sum @ Rs.4,000/- per month, being the maintenance amount to the respondent and also directed to pay a sum @ Rs.2,000/- per month, to the minor daughter of the respondent from the date of filing of the petition.

It is also to be noted here that the respondent has filed a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC, before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, stating that she got married with the petitioner three years back as per the Islamic Shariyat and thereafter, they live together as husband and wife and out of their wedlock, one girl child, namely, Jesmin Sultana born to them and she is two years old. Thereafter the petitioner subjected her to both physical and mental cruelty, demanding a sum of Rs.1 lac from her and as she failed to meet the demand of the petitioner, the respondent was driven out of the matrimonial home and being left with no other option, she has taken shelter in her parental abode and as the petitioner has not been providing any maintenance to her, despite having sufficient means and having landed properties, she has approached the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Barpeta, by filing a petition under Section 125 of the CrPC, for granting maintenance to her @ Rs.10,000/- per month and to her daughter @ Rs.7,000/- per month.

The petitioner has contested the said petition by filing written statement and the learned Court below, after hearing both the parties, passed the impugned Page No.# 3/4

judgment and order, as aforesaid.

Being highly aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court, by filing the present revision petition, challenging the quantum of maintenance, on the ground that he has no sufficient means as he is a daily wage labourer.

Mr. Barbhuiya, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only grievance of the petitioner is the quantum of maintenance, directed to be paid to the respondent by the learned Court below. Mr. Barbhuiya further submits that the petitioner is a daily wage earner and his daily income is about Rs.500/- and he has no landed property and as such he is unable to comply with the direction of the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Barpeta and therefore, it is contended to reduce the quantum of maintenance, so awarded by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Barpeta, from Rs.6,000/- (Rupees six thousand) to Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousands) per month.

On the other hand, Mr. DFA Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the petitioner has sufficient means to pay the amount, as directed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court and that, for the last one year and eight months, the petitioner has not been paying even a single penny to the respondent.

However, at the time of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be able to pay a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month and the learned counsel for the respondent, has agreed to the said proposal.

In view of above and as agreed by the parties, this revision petition stands disposed of, by modifying the quantum of maintenance to be paid by the petitioner to the respondent from Rs.4,000/- per month to Rs.3,000/- per month, being the maintenance amount to the respondent. The amount of the Page No.# 4/4

daughter of the respondent shall remain unchange. The modified amount of maintenance shall be paid to the respondent from the date of filing of the petition.

The petitioner is allowed to pay the arrear maintenance in four equal installments, within a period of four months.

In terms of the above, this criminal revision petition stands disposed of.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant