Harilal Pramanik vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3626 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
             Cr. Revision No. 1189 of 2023

Harilal Pramanik                                     ..... ......   Petitioner
                                          Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Smt. Shivani Paramanik                              .... .... Opp. Parties
                        ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

-------

      For the Petitioner              : Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, Advocate
      For the State                   : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P.
                                          --------
                           th
Order No.03 /Dated: 27 September, 2023
I.A. No.8853 of 2023

1. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State are present.

2. The instant Interlocutory Application has been preferred to stay the operation of the impugned judgment dated 04.07.2023 during pendency of this Criminal Revision.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that this Criminal Revision has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner against the impugned judgment dated 04.07.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Original Maintenance Case No.15 of 2019, whereby the petitioner has been directed to pay monthly maintenance as 30% of the admissible net pay to the opposite party No.2 and the minor daughter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the learned Court below while passing the impugned judgment has not taken into consideration the liabilities of the petitioner as his mother is dependent upon him and he has been paying the installment of loan. It is also submitted that during the pendency of the maintenance petition, the petitioner has been paying Rs.12,000/- per month as interim maintenance and contended that he is still ready to pay Rs.12,000/- per month, but in the meanwhile, prayed to stay the operation of the impugned judgment, by which, the petitioner has been directed to pay 30% of his net pay.

5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. In view of the submissions and materials on record, the operation of the impugned order is being stayed till the date fixed with condition that the petitioner shall continue to pay the amount of Rs.12,000/- per month to

opposite party No.2.

7. Accordingly, I.A. No.8853 of 2023 is disposed of. Cr. Revision No. 1189 of 2023

8. Admit.

9. Let notice be issued to the opposite party No.2 under registered cover with A/D as well as under ordinary process, for which, requisites etc. must be filed by the petitioner within two weeks.

10. Office is directed to call for the scanned copy of Lower Court Records.

11. List this case for hearing on 08.11.2023.

(Subhash Chand, J.) Madhav/-