Md. Mohammadul Hasan … v. 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Bibi Kishwar Jabeen
Case Details
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.920 of 2018 Md. Mohammadul Hasan …… Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Bibi Kishwar Jabeen --------- ……. Opp. Parties CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD For the Petitioner For the State For the O.P. No.2
Legal Reasoning
---------- : Mr. Sabyasanchi, Advocate : Mr. Nawin Kr. Singh, APP : Mr. Manoj Kr. Sah, Advocate ----------- Oral Order in Court 06/Dated: 26th June, 2023 Heard Mr. Sabyasanchi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Nawin Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State and Mr. Manoj Kumar Sah, learned counsel for the O.P. No.2. 2. This Criminal Revision No.920 of 2018 is being disposed with the consent of the learned counsel for both the sides as the learned counsel for both sides have agreed for payment of amount of Rs.4,000/- to the O.P. No.2. 3. This Criminal Revision has been filed on behalf of the petitioner by challenging the order dated 02.05.2018 passed by Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Godda in Maintenance Alteration Case No.05 of 2015 by which the learned Principal Judge has allowed the petition filed on behalf of the O.P. No.2 under section 127 of the Cr.P.C for enhancement of maintenance amount of Rs.250/- to Rs.20,000/- as monthly maintenance amount. 4. Although notice was issued to the O.P.No.2 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 17.12.2018, however, the Lower Court Record was not called for at that time and even on 08.12.2021 when this Criminal Revision was taken by another Co-ordinate Bench of this Court but the Lower Court Records were not called for.
Decision
However, this Criminal Revision is being disposed of in absence of the Lower Court Records with the consent of both the sides. 2 5. It transpires that vide order dated 06.09.1991, Sri A.K. Verma, Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class, Godda had allowed the maintenance amount of Rs.250/- per month to the O.P. No.2 to the petition filed under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. 6. It transpires that the wife of O.P.No.2 had filed a petition on 23.06.2015 under section 127 Cr.P.C for enhancement of maintenance amount. 7. It transpires from the impugned order and records of this Criminal Revision Application that the O.P. No.2 (i.e. the wife) had filed Maintenance Alteration Case No.05 of 2015 on 23.06.2015 against the petitioner for enhancement of maintenance amount from Rs.250/- to Rs.20,000/- per month as monthly maintenance amount because vide order dated 06.09.1991, the O.P. No.2 was allowed maintenance amount of Rs.250/- per month in Crl. Misc. Case No.02 of 1991 by Sri A.K. Verma then learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Godda. 8. The O.P. No.2 had got examined three witnesses in support of her case who are as follows:- (i) P.W-1 is Md. Mukkaram, (ii) P.W-2 is Md. Noorjiyahoo and (iii) P.W-3 is Md. Imrat Alam. 9. The wife-O.P.No.2 had filed one document which was marked as Exhibit-1 i.e. certified copy of order dated 06.09.1991 passed by the court of Sri A.K. Verma, Judicial Magistrate-Ist Class in Crl. Misc. no.02/1991. 10. It transpires that the petitioner (i.e. husband) had got examined three witnesses who are as follows:- (i) OPW-1 is Bebi Billo, who is the second wife of this petitioner, (ii) OPW-2 is Sabrin Khatoon who is daughter of the O.P. No.2 and (iii) OPW-3 is Farhad who is the son of the petitioner and the OPW-2 3 11. It transpires that O.P.W-1, OPW-2 and OPW-3 have supported the case of the petitioner. 12. It transpires that after considering the evidence of both the sides, the learned Court below has enhanced the maintenance amount of Rs.250/- per month to Rs.6,000/- per month to the O.P. No.2. 13. It transpires that the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Godda is cryptic and learned Principal Judge has not discussed the evidence of both the sides properly and passed the order by giving his finding in paragraph 12 only vide its impugned order which shows complete non-application of mind on behalf of the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Godda. 14. It appears that the petitioner is a retired Government Teacher and is getting pension of Rs.22,000/- per month in the year 2018. It appears that O.P. No.2 is the first wife of the petitioner who is living in her Maike which is evident from the evidence of OPW-2 and OPW-3 namely Sabrin Khatoon and Farhad who are the daughter and son of the O.P. No.2 and the petitioner. 15. However, considering the fact that the case has been compromised between the parties and learned counsel for both the sides have admitted “at Bar” that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs.4,000/- per month to the O.P. No.2, this Court is disposing of this Criminal Revision Application with the consent of both the sides with the direction that the petitioner shall pay Rs.4,000/- per month to the O.P. No.2 regularly from the date of filing of the case. 16. Under the circumstances, the order dated 02.05.2018 passed by Sri Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Godda in Maintenance Alteration Case No.05 of 2015 is modified to the extent that the petitioner namely Md. Mohammadul Hasan shall pay Rs.4,000/- per month to the O.P. No.2 regularly as monthly maintenance amount as both the sides have mutually agreed in the open Court that the petitioner will pay Rs.4,000/- per month to the 4 O.P. No.2 regularly from the date of filing of the petition under section 127 Cr.P.C. 17. The petitioner is directed to pay the arrears of enhanced maintenance amount after adjusting Rs.20,500/- paid by the petitioner to the O.P.No.2 which may be calculated before the learned court below and the petitioner shall deposit the remaining arrears amount within four months from today and shall continue to pay Rs.4,000/- per month from the next month. 18. With this observation, this Cr. Revision No.920 of 2018 is allowed. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned court below at once. Saket/- (Sanjay Prasad, J.)