PANCHAMI CHAKRABORTY Vs. AMIT CHAKRABORTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 30.05.2017 passed by the Family Court, West Tripura, Agartala in case No. Miscellaneous 252 of 2015 whereby the claim of the petitioner under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C in short) for maintenance allowance was turned down by the Family Court.

(2.) The facts in brief giving rise to the present petition are as follows:

(3.) In his written objection filed in the Family Court, the respondent denied his marriage with the petitioner and the paternity of her son. He contended that the petitioner was his next door neighbour who maintained illicit relationship with one Sri Pradip Chakraborty who was a relative of her and the respondent had seen them staying together in the house of the petitioner. According to the respondent, he had no other relationship with the petitioner apart from their neighbourly relationship and the petitioner never lived in his house. He further stated in his written objection that he was always ready to undergo a DNA test for determination of the paternity of her son. According to the respondent, since there was no marriage between him and the petitioner and even there was no live in relationship between them he was not liable to pay maintenance allowance to the petitioner.