Ishaque v. The State of Bihar
Case at a glance
Outcome
Remanded
hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Principal
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ss. 125, 125(1)
- Family Courts Act, 1984 s. 19(4)
- Family Courts Act s. 9
Judgment
.... .... Opp. Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, with Mr. Diwakar Sinha, Advocates. For the Opp. Party/s : Mr. M.D.Hussain, with Mr. K.D.Priya Ranjan, Advocates. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER 3 13-07-2012 Interlocutory Application No.741 of 2012 For the reasons disclosed in this interlocutory application, the delay occurred in filing the criminal revision application is hereby condoned. The application stands disposed of. Criminal Revision No.422 of 2012 The petitioner, being aggrieved by order dated 24th February 2010 passed in Maintenance Case No. M.P. 29 of 2002 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia allowing the claim of maintenance of Opposite Party no.2 @ Rs.1500/- per month in exercise of his powers under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.
P.C.) from the date of the order, has preferred the present revision application under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, assailing the correctness legality and propriety of the impugned order. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner Patna High Court CR. REV. No.422 of 2012 (3) dt.13-07-2012 has primarily assailed the impugned order on two grounds, namely the petitioner is a landless person and secondly the mandate of Section 9 of the Family Courts Act for making efforts for settlement has not been complied with. It is next contended that the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia has not properly assessed the monthly income of the petitioner, yet has fixed the amount of maintenance @ Rs. 1500/- per month, which requires reconsideration and reduction. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2, though has supported the impugned order, has not been able to dispute the aforesaid factual aspect.
Operative part
From perusal of the impugned order also it transpires that effort for amicable settlement could not be made by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the matter requires reconsideration and fresh decision by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia. However, in the meantime, interest of wife, i.e. Opposite Party no.2 is also required to be protected in terms of second proviso of Section 125(1) Cr. P. C. For the reasons recorded above, the impugned order dated 24th February 2010 passed in Maintenance Case No. M.P. 29 of 2002 by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia is hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia for fresh consideration and decision in accordance with law. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for Opposite Party no.2 undertake that the petitioner as also Opposite Party no.2 shall appear before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia on 30th July 2012 with a certified copy of the present order.
On their appearance the Patna High Court CR. REV. No.422 of 2012 (3) dt.13-07-2012 learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia shall fix a firm date for proceeding in the matter afresh. The parties shall be given a reasonable opportunity to produce their evidence/materials in support of their respective cases. All endeavours shall be made by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia to conclude the proceeding at an early date preferably by 31st December 2012. However, in the meantime, the petitioner shall pay to Opposite Party no.2 by way of interim maintenance @ Rs. 750/- per month from the date of the aforesaid order dated 24th February
2010. Arrears of interim maintenance @ Rs. 750/- per month shall be deposited by the petitioner within two months from today. If the petitioner fails to deposit the arrears of interim maintenance, as indicated above, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnia shall be at liberty to take all coercive measures to recover the aforesaid arrears of interim maintenance. The petitioner shall be further obliged to keep on depositing the amount of interim maintenance @ Rs. 750/- per month for each current month by the 1st week of next succeeding month. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application stands disposed of. (Birendra Prasad Verma, J) BTiwary/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: hereby set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Principal
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 125, 125(1); Family Courts Act, 1984 — s. 19(4); Family Courts Act — s. 9.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Patna High Court, on 24 Feb 2010. The bench was BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.