Tripura High Court
Mr. I. Chakraborty vs None on 5 January, 2023
Page 1 of 5
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
CRL.REV P NO.1 OF 2023
Shri Babul Kumar Saha
Vs.
Smt. Lipika Dey
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
Present:
For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. I. Chakraborty, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : None.
05.01.2023
Order
The case of the petitioner herein is that he is a
daily labour and the respondent herein is the legally married
wife of one Goutam Sarkar. Though due to cohabitation of
the petitioner and the respondent-lady herein, a male child
was born. The respondent-lady after abandoning the male
child fled away with one Samir Malakar, a BSF personnel.
After coming home from Punjab, the respondent-lady filed a
case for getting maintenance allowances before the Court of
learned Judge, Family Court Udaipur claiming herself as
legally married wife of the petitioner herein. The learned
Family Court, Udaipur Gomati District Tripura rejected the
same. Thereafter the respondent filed a Criminal Revision
Petition before this Court numbered as Crl.Rev.P.73/2019.
On 10.02.2020, this Court ordered a maintenance amount
of Rs.2,500/- to be paid to the present respondent w.e.f.
01.02.2020. In the last part of the order, this Court noted
that any findings returned by the said order would not come
in the way if the respondent therein questioned the validity
of the marriage in the Civil Court of Competent Jurisdiction.
As such, the present petitioner questioned the validity of
marriage and filed a case vide No.T.S.01/(Declaration)
/2021 before the Court below for declaring that the
respondent-lady is not his legally married wife. At this
stage, the present respondent-lady filed an Execution Case
against the petitioner and the learned Court below vide
order dated 13.01.2022 directed that the petitioner would
pay the arrear maintenance amount by the next date and in
the failure, whereof, the Court shall execute the order
passed by this Court. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a
revision petition being No.Crl.Rev.P.06 of 2022 before this
Court for quashing the above order. This Court vide
judgment dated 10.03.2022 upheld the order of the learned
Court below by stating in para-9 of the said judgment that
the Court by way of this revision petition has only made an
arrangement for depositing the amount by the petitioner
and withdrawal to be made by the respondent under a
proper indemnity. The respondent shall file the indemnity
before the Executive Court.
The petitioner deposited the said amount and the
respondent-lady has withdrew the same by indemnity bond.
Thereafter she again filed an Execution Case before the
Court below for taking maintenance from the petitioner
without any indemnity bond.
Hence, the petitioner filed this instant revision
petition praying for the following reliefs:-
" i) Admit the Criminal Revision Petition;
ii) Issue notice upon the respondent;
iii) Call for the lower Court records vide case
no.Crl.Misc(Ex)26/2022 from the Court of Ld. Judge, Family
Court, Udaipur, Gomati Tripura.
iv) Stay the operation of the order dated 26.09.2022
and 24.11.2022 in case No.Crl.Misc. (Ex.)26/2022 passed by the
learned Court below till disposal of the instant Criminal Revision
Petition.
v) After hearing both sides and after meticulous gone
through the documents be pleased to make order by quashing the
order dated 26.09.2022 and 24.11.2022 in case No.Crl.Misc.
(Ex.)26/2022 passed by the Court below;
vi) Make order as per the order of this Hon'ble Court in
Case No.Crl. Rev.P. 06/2022 dated 10.03.2022 as reflected in
para-9 of the said order;
vii) Make order for efficious and early disposal of the
Declaration case bearing No.T.S.(Declaration)01/2021 in the
Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Udaipur, Gomati Tripura
in favour of the present petitioner as far as practicable within six
months as the case is now dragging for a long period;"
This instant criminal revision petition has come
up today in the motion stage. Heard Mr. I. Chakraborty,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.
Mr. I. Chakraborty learned counsel submits that
the respondent-lady is not his wife and by false document,
she has taken this matter before the Court below. After
withdrawing the amount deposited by the petitioner herein
by indemnity bond, she has filed an Execution Case for
maintenance against the petitioner without any indemnity
bond before the Court below. The present petitioner is in a
bedridden condition due to an accident and he is now under
medical treatment. The petitioner has submitted the
prescription of his injury before the Court below. The Court
below has not taken into account the said fact and has
issued a distress warrant in the Execution proceeding dated
24.11.2022. There is also an unnecessary delay in the
declaration case.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and perused the evidence on record.
The contention raised by the petitioner-counsel is
not for this Court to decide. This Court has rejected the
contention raised the petitioner in the earlier round of
litigation. The petitioner in the Executive Proceeding before
the lower Court was absent on 24.11.2022 and even his
respective Advocate has not filed any representation that
his client is unwell.
In view of the above discussion, this Court feels
that this instant petition is devoid of merit and the same is
liable to be dismissed and, accordingly, the same is
dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
suhanjit
