(Suhrid Kr. Roy vs State & Anr.) on 13 June, 2017

1

2 13.06.2017
an Court No. 34
CRR 578 of 2017
(Suhrid Kr. Roy vs. State anr.)

Mr. Phiroze Edulji
…………. for the Petitioner

None appears on behalf of the private respondent even after repeated

calls. Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

According to him, the marriage was solemnized by and between the

parties in 1996 but within a year that was dissolved and the wife left the husband

and since then there is no reunion between them. But his wife has filed a case

under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a case under Section 498A of

the Indian Penal Code as well as a case under Domestic Violence Act.

The order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sealdah in Criminal

Appeal nos. 19/2016 and 23/2016 and 35/2016 has been challenged here. The

learned Sessions Judge, Sealdah has confirmed the order passed by the learned

Judicial Magistrate. Apparently, there is no error committed by the learned trial

court. However, since this is a case under Domestic Violence Act, an appeal has to

be preferred under Sections 18 and 19 of the said Act, and accordingly the present

petitioner has preferred the appeal.

It is submitted on behalf of the Bar that the case under Section 125 of

the Code of Criminal Procedure is at the stage of argument and it is supposed to be

heard on 20.06.2017. His only prayer is such that before it attain its finality, some

sort of reduction in regard to the maintenance amount may be made. Since the

other side is not here and there is nothing on record from the other side that there

is significant increase in the income of the present husband petitioner, I am of the

view that in the interest of justice, it may be made to the extent of Rs. 4,000/-

instead of Rs. 5,000/- per month, as an award is passed by the learned Magistrate
2

in connection with Domestic Violence Act.

Therefore, the impugned order is modified to that extent and the learned

trial court is hereby directed to dispose of the application within a month from this

date positively.

Hence, the criminal revisional application stands allowed in part.

Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, shall be given

to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of all necessary formalities.

(Siddhartha Chattopadhyay, J.)

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *