Md. Jabir Hussain vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2024 Latest Caselaw 5989 Gua

Gauhati High Court

Md. Jabir Hussain vs The State Of Assam And Anr on 16 August, 2024

Author: Manash Ranjan Pathak

Bench: Manash Ranjan Pathak

                                                                        Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010068702023




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

                                 Case No. : Crl.Pet./322/2023

            MD. JABIR HUSSAIN
            S/O MD. SAHJAHAN HUSSAIN
            R/O DEHAJAN NEAR DEHAJAN MAJID, P.O. DEMOW, P.S. MORAN, DIST.
            SIVASAGAR, ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
            THROUGH THE PP, ASSAM

            2:MRS. BENJIR NARFA AZAM
            W/O MD. JABIR HUSSAIN
            D/O MUKIBUR RAHMAN
            R/O GELEKEY GGS NO. 1 GOAD

            P.O. AND P.S. GELEKEY
            DIST. SIVASAGAR
            ASSA

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR R CHAKRAVORTY, S RABHA

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, MR S T ADNAN (R- 2),SAMIM RAHMAN (R- 2),A W
AMAN (R- 2),MS SURAYA RAHMAN (R- 2),MR S A BARBHUYAN (R- 2),MR SARFRAZ
NAWAZ (R- 2)
                                                                                       Page No.# 2/3




                                   BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

                                              ORDER

16-08-2024 Heard Mr. R Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. S Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. A W Aman, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

2. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate (M), Nazira, Sivasagar by its order dated 06.07.2022 passed in Misc. Case No. 26/2020 preferred by the respondent No. 2 claiming monthly maintenance for her and their minor daughter under Section 125 CrPC, directed the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 4,000/- per month to his wife/respondent No. 2 and Rs. 3,000/- to their minion daughter until further order every month as per Gregorian Calendar w.e.f. the date of passing of the said Final Order, i.e., 06.07.2022.

3. Being aggrieved with the said Final Order of the learned SDJM(M), Naziara, Sivasagar dated 06.07.2022, the petitioner filed a revision petition before the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar being Criminal Revision Petition No. 25 (3)/2022 and after hearing the parties the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar by order dated 01.02.2023 dismissed the said revision petition of the petitioner upholding the order of the learned SDJM (M), Nazira dated 06.07.2022 pertaining to the monthly maintenance to the respondent No. 2 and their minor daughter.

4. Dissatisfied with the findings of the learned SDJM(M), Naziara, Sivasagar as well as the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar, the petitioner has filed this criminal petition, stating that the learned SDJM(M), Naziara, Sivasagar while passing the final order dated 06.07.2022 and the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar while passing the order dated 01.02.2023 committed illegality in not complying with the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh -Vs - Neha & Another decided on 04.11.2020 reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324.

5. Mr. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the impugned orders of the learned SDJM(M), Naziara, Sivasagar as well as the learned Sessions Judge, Sivasagar dated 06.07.2022 and 01.02.2023, respectively, are after the said order of the Hon'ble Apex Court passed in the case of Rajnesh (Supra) and without complying with the directions passed in the said judgment passed in the case of Rajnesh (Supra), therefore, both the impugned Page No.# 3/3

orders should be set aside and quashed.

6. On the other hand, Mr. Aman, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2/applicant/wife of the petitioner submitted that only after considering the fact in evidence that the petitioner has sufficient means, a truck, tea-estate and other properties etc. and having sufficient annual income, the learned Magistrate passed the impugned order dated 06.07.2022 directing the petitioner to pay monthly maintenance amount of Rs. 4,000/- per month to his wife/respondent No. 2 and Rs. 3,000/- to their minion daughter and as such, the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh -Vs- Neha & Another (Supra) will not be applicable in the present case.

7. Heard both the parties at length.

8. Considering the above, list this matter on 27.08.2024, enabling the respondent No. 2 to apprise the Court the monthly maintenance she is receiving from the petitioner including the amount(s) and date(s), for further consideration.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant