AJIJ MIAH Vs. NUR NAHAR CHOWDHURY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. T.D. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

(2.) There is no dispute that the petitioner and the respondent are legally married. The respondent was compelled to leave the matrimonial home having failed to bear the physical torture for realising unlawful demand. Thereafter, she filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. on 10.03.2006 claiming the monthly maintenance allowance from the petitioner, the opposite party in Cr. Misc/FC/UDP/107/2012. The respondent has further stated in the said application that the petitioner earns a sum of Rs.15,000/- per month but he has not been given any amount towards maintenance. It appears from the records that the respondent adduced two witnesses viz. herself (PW-1) and Sri Basiruddin Chowdhury, her brother .

(3.) Mr. Das, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was not given any opportunity either to cross examine PWs-1 & 2 or to give his evidence. Thus, he has been seriously prejudiced. It cannot be gathered from the deposition, as annexed with the petition, whether any scope of cross examination was permitted or not. However, it appears that the petitioner had also examined himself as OPW-1, but there is no cross examination. In the trial, he has not stated anything about his income but there is no cross examination against the statement of the respondent that the petitioner earned Rs.10,000/- per month .