Smt. Mousumi Akter vs Md. Ikbal Hossain
2022 Latest Caselaw 868 Tri

                               Page 1 of 8


                     HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                           AGARTALA
                    CRL. REV. P NO.31 OF 2022

1. Smt. Mousumi Akter,
W/o. Md. Ikbal Hossain,
D/o. Md. Gulam Mostafa
Of Gazaria, A.D. Nagar(S.D. Mission Colony)
P.S.- A.D. Nagar, District-West Tripura.

2. Miss Jenifa Hossain Tanvir,
(Minor daughter represented by her mother)
D/o- Md. Ikbal Hossain,
Of Gazaria, A.D. Nagar (S.D. Mission Colony)
P.S.- A.D. Nagar, District-West Tripura.

                                ----- Revision Petitioner(s)

                                Versus

Md. Ikbal Hossain,
S/o. Majibur Rahaman,
Of Gazaria, Krishna Sangha,
P.S. A.D. Nagar, Dist- West Tripura.
                                             ----- Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. M. Pal, Advocate.

   For the Respondent(s)       : Mr. T. Chakraborty, Advocatel

   Date of hearing and delivery of
   Judgment & Order              : 19.09.2022.

   Whether fit for reporting    : YES/NO.


                       BEFORE
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD

            J U D G M E N T & O R D E R(ORAL)

The present revision petition is filed under Section 397

& 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with

Section 19 of the Family Court Act 1984, against the impugned

judgment and order dated 04.04.2022 passed by the learned

Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura in connection with

Case No. Criminal Misc. No.406 of 2018, wherein the learned

Addl. Judge, Family Court passed an order directing the

respondent to pay maintenance of Rs.10,500/- every month to

the revision petitioner.

2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that marriage

between the petitioner-wife and respondent-husband was

solemnized on 11.12.2005 as per Muslim rites and customs, in

presence of the parents, relatives, and friends of both sides.

Out of their wedlock, they gave birth to a female child on

11.09.2009. After that, the respondent-husband got a job offer

as a Constable from Tripura police and he joined police training

at the KTDS Police Training Academy. After the completion of

the training period, the respondent-husband joined at Unakoti

District. At that period, he started avoiding his wife as well as

her minor daughter. When the respondent-husband came back

home on leave, the petitioner-wife questioned him about his

whereabouts, for which he brutally assaulted her without any

reason. In the year, 2012, her minor daughter was admitted to

Auxillium Girls School at the age of 3(three) years but the

family members of the respondent did not wanted that,

thereafter, both the parties shifted to a rented house at

Nandannagar near their daughter's school. After 7/8 months, it

is alleged that the family member again started asking the

petitioner-wife to bring back her minor daughter to a general

Bengali Medium School but the petitioner-wife did not change

her mind and continued her minor daughter's studies in the

Auxilium school. Moreover, the respondent stopped paying

money to her and further stopped visiting the rented house.

Finding no other alternative, in the year 2016 father of the

petitioner-wife informed the matter to the higher authorities of

the respondent to resolve the problem but he refuse to do so.

On many occasions, the respondent assaulted her. Finding no

other alternative, the petitioner-wife went back to her father's

house along with her minor daughter and she was completely

depending upon her parents having no source of income of her

own, whereas the respondent neither made any communication

nor provided anything towards their maintenance and

livelihood. On 26.02.2018, the petitioner informed the higher

authority of her husband and after discussion, the respondent

gave a written commitment before the high authority to pay an

amount of Rs.8,000/- every month, but the respondent had

sent only Rs.5,000/- to the petitioner-wife. On 10.05.2018, the

petitioner-wife along with her minor daughter met the

Superintendent of police, North Tripura at Dharmanagar, but

the respondent on seeing her got furious and threatened to kill

her and her minor daughter by showing his service firearms.

The petitioner-wife faced financial problems to maintain herself

and her daughter's expenses. Therefore, she filed a petition

under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. against the respondent before the

learned Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura Agartala

claiming maintenance from the respondent for herself and her

minor daughter. The said petition was registered as

Misc.(main)406 of 2018. In the said petition, the petitioner-

wife prayed before the Court below to pay an amount of

Rs.20,000/- per month as maintenance for herself and her

minor daughter.

3. After receipt of the notice, the respondent-

husband appeared and participated in the process of

reconciliation, which ultimately failed and he submitted the

written objection. In his written objection, the respondent-

husband denied almost all the allegations made by the

petitioner-wife in her application. He stated in his written

objection that the petitioner-wife has been continuously putting

pressure upon him since 2/3 months of their marriage to leave

the company and house of his parents and to start residing

with her at her father's residence. As he refused, she became

furious and started mental torture upon him, for which, finding

no other alternative, he was compelled to leave his paternal

house and the company of his parents and started living in a

rented house in the area of his father-in-law. It is stated that

the petitioner-wife even did not get satisfied and she continued

to torture him mentally and threatened him and his family

member to involve in a false case, as his father is a superior

officer to him. He stated that he was all along ready to stay

with his wife and daughter, but the petitioner-wife voluntarily

left him by making false allegations. He stated to have never

tortured his wife either physically or mentally and alleged that

initially, he had suffered in maintaining the studies of his

daughter in private school and a rented house out of his

meager income. The respondent-husband further contended

that presently, the petitioner-wife is involved in a private

service which she has concealed in her application and that out

of his monthly salary, he has to incur huge expenditure of his

old-aged parents as well as his own livelihood. Stating this the

respondent-husband prayed before the Court below that he is

unable to provide maintenance.

4. The revision petitioner also filed for interim

maintenance for herself and her minor daughter, and in the

said case of Misc.(Interim)407 of 2018, the respondent-

husband was directed to pay the interim maintenance of

Rs.12,000/- per month to the revision petitioner and her minor

daughter.

5. After completion of the trial and hearing the

argument of both sides, the learned Addl. Judge, Family Court,

West Tripura passed a judgment and order dated 04.04.2022

and reduced the amount and directed to pay a maintenance

amount of Rs.10,500/- per month to the revision-petitioner and

her minor daughter.

6. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the

impugned judgment and order dated 04.04.2022, passed by

the learned Addl. Judge, Family Court, West Tripura, the

revision-petitioner wife herein has preferred this present

revision petition for directing the respondent-husband herein to

pay a maintenance allowance for an amount of Rs.20,000/- per

month only in favour of the revision petitioner and his minor

daughter.

7. Heard Ms. M. Pal, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner-wife as well as Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned

counsel appearing for the respondent-husband.

8. Ms. M. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner-wife submitted that the school expenses, admission

fees, and the tuition fee of her minor daughter have increased

to Rs.17,000/- per month. Her client is facing financial strains

in coping with the daily expenses as well as the educational

expenses of the minor daughter. Stating thus, learned counsel

urged this Court to allow this present petition.

9. Mr. T. Chakraborty, learned counsel appearing

for the respondent-husband submits that his client has taken

loan due to which his gross salary has decreased. Further

respondent-husband has to bear the medical expenses of his

aged cancer patient father and take care of him. His other

family members are also totally dependent on him. Learned

counsel further produced a photograph before this Court

alleging that the petitioner-wife has already married again. So,

learned counsel urged this Court to dismiss this instant

petition.

10. After hearing both sides and perusing the

evidence on record, this Court feels that considering the

financial condition of the respondent-husband and his

responsibility to maintain his aged cancer patient father as well

as his other family member, the maintenance allowance of

Rs.10,500/-(Rupees Ten thousand & Five hundred only) per

month given by the Court below is just and proper. Further, the

petitioner-wife has not been able to provide any documentary

evidence in favour of his argument that the admission cost,

school fees, and tuition fees of her minor daughter have

amounts to Rs.17,000/- per month.

11. Observing thus, this Court is of the opinion that

the lower Court order dated 04.04.2022 directing the

respondent-husband to pay Rs.10,500/- per month is just and

proper and needs no interference, and the same is affirmed.

Accordingly, this instant petition stands dismissed.

12. Consequently pending application(s), if any, also

stand closed.

Send back the LCRs.

JUDGE

suhanjit