Tripura High Court
Mr. T.K. Deb vs Mr. R. Datta on 1 September, 2021
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Crl. Rev. P. No. 40 of 2021
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.K. Deb, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R. Datta, P.P.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY
Order
01/09/2021
[1] This criminal revision petition has been filed by Sri
Sankha Subhra Roy Choudhury challenging the impugned order dated
01.04.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura,
Agartala in Criminal Appeal 27 of 2018 whereby the learned Additional
Sessions Judge remanded the case to the trial court with the following
directions:
"17..............................Having observed thus, I am of
the considered opinion that the order so passed by
the Ld. Trial Court is arbitrary and cannot sustain.
Accordingly, the order dated 09/10/2018 passed
by the Trial Court in Case No. CR 43 of 2016
stands set aside with direction to the Ld. Trial
Court to record the evidence of the appellant
petitioner namely, Sarmistha Banik in regard to
the present source of income of the respondent
No.1 in determining the quantum of maintenance
to be awarded in favour of the Appellant Petitioner.
Trial Court is also to accept the documentary
evidence in regard to the income of Respondent
No.1, if produced and proceed in the way, an
application under section 125 of Cr. PC is disposed
of and while disposing of the record, it must be
borne in mind that acts of domestic violence upon
the appellant by the respondents have been held
by this Court to have been proved. While passing
this direction, this Court is certainly aware of the
principles of Natural Justice and as such, sufficient
scope be given to the respondent side to lead their
evidence in discarding the evidence of the
appellant, if any, in regard to the source of income
of respondent No.1 and nothing else. In short,
evidence in regard to the quantum of maintenance
is only to be decided and respondent side cannot
furnish any other evidence in regard to any other
aspect, as they have themselves shut down their
opportunity. Ld. Trial Court is to dispose of the
said matter within a period of 3 months from the
date of receive of the record, and pass necessary
order to pay appropriate monetary relief to the
appellant petitioner and pass any other order(s) as
would be appropriate thereto.
Accordingly, this appeal stands allowed................"
[2] A complaint under section 12 of the Protection of
Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 was filed by the wife of the
petitioner in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate on various
allegations of domestic violence which was heard and disposed of by a
judgment dated 09.10.2018 passed by Judicial Magistrate 1st Class
(Court No.6), West Tripura in case No. CR 43 of 2016. The learned trial
Judge held that petitioner wife failed to establish any incident of
domestic violence. Therefore, the learned trial court declined to grant
any relief to her. The said decision of the trial court was challenged in
appeal before the learned Additional Sessions Judge in which he passed
the order as aforesaid.
[3] Main grievance of the petitioner is that while remanding
the case to the trial court, opportunity of adducing fresh evidence was
granted only to the wife and such opportunity was denied to the
husband (present petitioner).
[4] It is contended by Mr. T.K. Deb, learned counsel that
the present criminal revision petition is filed for setting aside the said
erroneous order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Similar
opportunity should also have been granted to the petitioner husband.
Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P appears for the State
respondent.
[5] Perused the entire case record including the judgments
of the trial court as well as the appellate court. Considered the
submissions made by Mr. Deb, learned counsel.
[6] The criminal revision petition stands admitted for
hearing. Issue rule returnable within three weeks. Steps be taken within
five days for service of notice on respondent No.1. Call for the LC
record.
[7] Meanwhile the operation of the impugned judgment of
the learned Additional Sessions Judge shall remain stayed. All efforts
shall be taken to hear the matter finally on the next date.
List the matter on 22.09.2021.
JUDGE
Rudradeep
