Dhananjay Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand
2025 Latest Caselaw 229 Jhar

Jharkhand High Court

Dhananjay Mandal vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 May, 2025

Author: Sanjay Prasad

Bench: Sanjay Prasad

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
           Criminal Revision No. 453 of 2018
                         ---------

     Dhananjay Mandal                    ..... Petitioner
                         Versus
     1.The State of Jharkhand
     2.Smt. Ahilya Devi                  ..... Opp. Parties
                         ----------

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

---------

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhaskar Trivedi, Advocate For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, A.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rajiv Kr. Karn, Advocate

---------

21/07.05.2025 Heard learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

2. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the O.P. No. 2 that Opp. Party No. 2 has received Rs.7454.67 paise only for six months, i.e. till 31.01.2024 which amounts to Rs.44,728.02 paise out of total due amount of Rs.08,08,000/- (Rupees Eight Lac eight thousand) for which he has filed counter affidavit on 19.02.2024 and a copy of the same has been served upon the petitioner. It appears that no reply has been given on behalf of the petitioner to the counter affidavit dated 19.02.2024 filed on behalf of O.P.No.2.

3. It appears that till the month of January, 2024 the O.P. No.2 had received Rs.44,728.02 paise (Rupees Forty four thousand Seven hundred twenty eight and two paise) out of total due amount of Rs.08,08,000/-(Rupees Eight lakh eight thousand) @ Rs.7454.67 paise per month only for six months, i.e. till 31.01.2024 and now this case is placed before this Court in the month of May, 2025. It appears that the learned Family Court has passed order for grant of monthly

maintenance amount of Rs.8,000/- to O.P.No.2, which is under challenge, however, the O.P.No.2 was getting only around 7,454/- per month till 31.01.2024.

4. It appears from the record that this Court, vide order dated 19.12.2023, had called for a report from the Senior Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad regarding the properties of the petitioner and his family members through the concerned police station.

5. Pursuant to the said order, Senior Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad, vide Letter dated 311 dated 27.01.2024 informed the Assistant Registrar of the High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi that the properties of the petitioner and his family members were verified and the petitioner has performed two marriages and his first wife is Shimoti Mandalani and he has performed second marriage with Ahilya Mandal. From his first wife the petitioner has got three children, i.e. two sons and one daughter, whereas he has got one son from his second wife also. It has also been informed that the petitioner, namely Dhananjay Mandal has got two houses, both of which are Pucca.

It is further informed that the petitioner has got Sammilad 30.49 Acres of land in which he has got 1/4th share.

It is also informed that papers of land of the petitioner has also been verified by the Anchal Adhikari and it has been informed by the Anchal Adhikari, vide letter dated 24.01.2024 that the petitioner has got 11.91 Acre of Sammilad land.

6. Though, the report is a vague one, but the report of the Anchal Adhikari reveals that the petitioner has got 11.91 acres of land. Apart from this, it would

appear that he has got two separate houses where his first wife and his second wife are residing respectively along with his children.

7. From record it appears that the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhanbad had disbelieved the defence of the petitioner that O.P. No.2 is not his wife.

8. Even in the case of Manmohan Gopal Versus State of Chhattisgarh and Another reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1384, at Para 17 and 19, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has also directed for putting the shop of husband of the Respondent No.2 (i.e. the wife) on sale and approved the attachment of properties of the Appellant and his son towards the arrears of maintenance amount.

9. Under the circumstances and in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner is directed to pay Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lac) to the O.P.No.2 within Six (06) weeks from today, failing which his properties may be liable to attachment.

10. If the petitioner fails to deposit Rs. 4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lacs) within the said period of Six (06) weeks, then this Court may direct the Deputy Commissioner, Dhanbad and Sr. Superintendent of Police, Dhanbad to take necessary steps for attaching the property of the petitioner.

11. Put up this case on 23rd June, 2025.

(Sanjay Prasad, J.) s.m.