Patna High Court
Manwendra Nath Chawdhary vs Laxmi Devi on 19 August, 2025
Author: Arun Kumar Jha
Bench: Arun Kumar Jha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL REVISION No.180 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Patna
======================================================
Manwendra Nath Chawdhary S/O Late Chandra Deo Chawdhary Permanent
Address- Village- Garkha, P.S.- Garkha, District- Saran (Chapra), Presently
residing at Ranjan Path, Near Gyan Niketan School, Danapur, P.S.- Danapur,
District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Laxmi devi w/o late Raghuwendra Chawdhary R/o Sector No. 3, Block- 8,
Flat No. 44, MIG Bhadurpur Hosing Colony, Kankarbagh, P.S.- Agamkuan,
District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chetan Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Onkar Nath, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 19-08-2025
Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
02. For the reasons mentioned in the limitation
petition bearing I.A. No. 02 of 2023, delay in filing the present
criminal revision petition is condoned.
03. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated
21.06.2019
passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge,
Family Court, Patna in Maintenance Case No. 10(m) of 2017
whereby and whereunder the learned trial court has directed the
petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 15,000/- per month as
maintenance allowance to the opposite party with effect from
the date of filing of the maintenance case payable by 20 th day of
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.180 of 2022 dt.19-08-2025
each month. The petitioner was further directed to pay a lump
sum amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the opposite party as litigation
cost and was also directed to pay the arrears of maintenance to
the opposite party in three equal installments within a year.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
opposite party filed Maintenance Case No. 10 of 2017 claiming
herself to be the wife of the petitioner but without service of
notice, the matter proceeded ex parte against the petitioner.
Learned counsel further submits that there is no service report
on record and without recording satisfaction about the petitioner
avoiding service, the learned trial court took recourse to
substituted service by way of publication. Learned counsel
further submits that the opposite party has not made any
averment about the date, time and place of her marriage with the
petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that admittedly the
opposite party is the sister-in-law of the petitioner who was
earlier married with the elder brother of the petitioner.
Admittedly, there was two children out the wedlock of opposite
party and the elder brother of the petitioner and just in order to
grab the property of the petitioner, a conspiracy has been
hatched by the opposite party with her sons. Learned counsel
further submits that when the deposition of the opposite party as
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.180 of 2022 dt.19-08-2025
PW-1 was being recorded in the maintenance case, she stated
that she has two sons out of wedlock with the petitioner, which
is contradictory to her averment in the maintenance petition.
Learned counsel further submits that the learned trial court did
not believe this deposition of the petitioner about her son being
the children of this petitioner. Learned counsel further submits
that no evidence has come on record about the income of the
petitioner, still, the learned trial court assumed the income of the
petitioner on the basis of the statement of the witnesses and
ordered the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 15,000/- per
month as maintenance allowance to the opposite party. Learned
counsel, thus, submits that the impugned order suffers from
various illegalities and is not sustainable and the same be set
aside.
05. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
opposite party vehemently argues that there is no merit in the
submission of learned counsel for the petitioner and the
impugned order is perfectly legal and proper. Learned counsel
further submits that the opposite party has stated in her
maintenance petition that she was married with the petitioner in
the year 1992, though the children are out of wedlock of her
earlier husband and after marriage with the petitioner, they were
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.180 of 2022 dt.19-08-2025
treated as children of the petitioner and the documents in this
regard have been filed before the learned trial court showing the
petitioner to be father of the children. Learned counsel further
submits that the petitioner has been working as Ranger in Forest
Department and the said fact has been taken note of by the
learned trial court. Learned counsel further submits that being
already married, the petitioner did not solemnize second
marriage for quite long time and only in the year 2015, he has
solemnized another marriage and therefore, necessity arose for
filing this maintenance petition by the opposite party. Thus, the
learned counsel submits that the impugned order does not suffer
from any illegality and same be sustained.
06. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the
rival submission of the parties. From perusal of record, it is
quite apparent that except for the assertion of the opposite party
and her witnesses, there is only vague averment about
solemnization of marriage of the opposite party with the
petitioner. Thereafter, the contention of the learned counsel for
the petitioner about there being no cogent material about income
of the petitioner on record also seems to be correct as merely on
the oral submission, income of the petitioner was decided. In
any case, the matter proceeded ex parte against the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.180 of 2022 dt.19-08-2025
and whatever be the rival claims of the parties regarding service
of summons upon the petitioner, this Court thinks it appropriate
to remand the matter to the learned trial court for consideration
afresh after setting aside the impugned order.
07. Accordingly, the impugned order dated
21.06.2019 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the
learned trial court for consideration afresh while granting liberty
to the petitioner to agitate all the issues and his contentions
before the learned trial court which will proceed in the matter
afresh and dispose of the maintenance case strictly in
accordance with law at the earliest considering the mandate of
law.
08. Both the parties would appear before the learned
trial court on 03.09.2025.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 21.08.2025
Transmission Date 21.08.2025
