In The High Court At Calcutta
Criminal Revisional Jurisdiction
CRR 1695 of 2018
Manoj Kumar Shaw
Puja Shaw Anr.
Mr. Asit Kumar Bhattacharyya
… for the petitioner.
In this application the petitioner/husband has challenged the order dated
May 11, 2018 passed by the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,
Calcutta in Misc. Case No. 38 of 2016 whereby and whereunder the learned
Judge allowed the application under Section 125 CrPC in part and directed the
petitioner/husband to pay to his wife a sum of Rs.4,000/- per month towards
her maintenance allowance from 1st May, 2018 and further awarded one-time
litigation cost of Rs.2,000/-.
The ground taken by the petitioner/husband is that he is only earning Rs.
74,730/- per annum as per the Income Tax Return for the assessment year
2017-2018. The learned judge while considering the quantum of maintenance
came to conclude on the basis of the cross-examination of the husband. The
petitioner did not send any request letter to his wife to come back to his place
but had personally went to her to take her back and during pendency of this
application he had preferred a divorce suit and maintenance pendentelite under
Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act in the said matrimonial suit was being paid
According to the wife the earning of her husband was to the tune of
Rs.30,000/- as agent of LIC and other businesses. E-money order was also taken
for consideration which shows that he had paid maintenance pendentelite at the
rate of Rs.6,000/-. So, obviously the Maintenance pendente lite under Section 24
of Hindu Marriage Act must have been considered on the basis of evidence.
So, I do not find any ground to interfere into the order impugned.
Thus, this revisional application being CRR 1695 of 2018 is dismissed.
sh ( Shivakant Prasad, J.)