Patna High Court
Sabbir Hussain vs Sakila Bano on 30 January, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.104 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District-
======================================================
Sabbir Hussain, s/o Phal Mohamad r/o village Hathauda, PO Chhapia, PS
Hussainganj, District Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Sakila Bano w/o Sabbir Hussain, d/o Khodaddin Ansari, r/o village Hathauda,
P.O. Chhapia, P.S. Hussainganj, District Siwan, at present r/o village
Bhawrajpur, PO Bhawrajpur, PS Andar, District Siwan.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : None
For the Respondent/s : Mr. APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 30-01-2023
From the perusal of record, it appears that no one
appeared on behalf of petitioner on 17.01.2023, when matter
came on board for the first time after the filing, which was
made on 30.01.2017 i.e. about lapse of six years.
2. This matter was again listed today but none appeared
on behalf of petitioner.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved and dissatisfied by order
dated 19.11.2016 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court,
Siwan, in Maintenance Case No. 253/2010, whereby and
whereunder monthly maintenance of Rs. 2000/- was awarded to
the wife (opposite party).
4. The court is having of two options, either to dismiss this
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.104 of 2017 dt.30-01-2023
case in default giving a space to petitioner to seek restoration of
case and again to keep this litigations alive, where opposite
party is struggling for her maintenance, the 2 nd option as
available to this Court is to go through the records of the case
and to take an appropriate view on the basis of materials
available on the records and legal provisions as applicable to
the given set of facts and circumstances.
5. The court, after considering both as discussed above
choosed, the 2nd option by taking note of ultimate object of law
as to save the opposite party from the hand of destitution, as
therefore perused the records of the case to take an appropriate
view on the basis of materials available on the records and legal
provisions as applicable to the given set of facts and
circumstances, for just and equitable decision.
6. The Learned Family Court directed the petitioner to
pay a monthly maintenance amount of Rs. 2000/- from the date
of filing of this petition.
7. On perusal of impugned order, it appears that opposite
party was ousted from her matrimonial home by the petitioner
due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, which has been
raised for one Yamaha motorcycle. It also appears that opposite
party was subjected to physical assault and torture for which a
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.104 of 2017 dt.30-01-2023
case was registered under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code.
8. The matter was contested by petitioner before the
Learned Family Court saying that opposite party willfully
neglected the petitioner and she has her own source of income.
9. On perusal of impugned order, it appears that Learned
Family Court examined petitioner as OPW No. 1, where he
admitted marriage with opposite party. He also admitted to
work in foreign country as Plumber. It is also admitted that
opposite party is not living with him, whereas he denied his 2 nd
marriage and also the allegation of physical assault. He also
denied the factum of earning as alleged by opposite party.
10. OPW No. 2, namely, Mintu Ansari also stated that
opposite party is legally wedded wife of petitioner. OPW No. 2
also supported that petitioner worked in foreign country where
he earned about Rs. 3000-4000/- per month.
11. Finally, OPW No. 3, namely, Nazir Hussain also
stated that opposite party is legally wedded wife of petitioner.
This witness specifically submitted that due to quarrel and
differences between the parties, the family members of
petitioner ousted opposite party. This witness also admitted that
petitioner was employed somewhere in foreign. From the
deposition of witnesses as discussed above, learned Family
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.104 of 2017 dt.30-01-2023
Court came to a conclusion that opposite party is a legally
wedded wife of petitioner and she was ousted from her
matrimonial home without any just reason. The learned Family
Court also came to conclusion that there is no evidence on
record which may suggest that opposite party was divorced by
the petitioner.
12. By taking note of the grounds, raised in present
revision application and also as nothing substantial surfaced
from the deposition of witnesses as discussed above, this Court
find no reason to interfere with the order of the learned Family
Court.
13. In the totality of circumstances, this Court finds that
by no stretch of imagination, it can be argued that a sum of Rs.
2000/- awarded as a maintenance amount from the date of filing
is said to be excessive particularly under the circumstances
when the evidence suggest that petitioner is a skilled worker
admittedly doing job of Plumber in foreign country. This Court
is, therefore, of the considered opinion that the impugned order
needs no interference, on this score also.
14. In the circumstances, this Court directs Principal
Judge, Family Court, Siwan to recover the entire arrears of
maintenance in terms of impugned order with a cost of Rs.
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.104 of 2017 dt.30-01-2023
30,000/- from the petitioner by taking all such actions
expeditiously, which are permissible under law and ensure that
the payment of amount to the opposite party be made available
as early as possible. Payment towards maintenance, if made any
be adjusted accordingly.
15. Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
AFR/NAFR NA
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 03.02.2023
Transmission Date
