NISHI KANTA HALDER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision application is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.11.1998 passed by Shri S. Bhattacharyya, S.D.J.M., Diamond Harbour in Misc. Case No. 46 of 1995/T.R. No. 379/1998 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. By this order the learned S.D.J.M. allowed a maintenance petition under Section 125, Cr.P.C. filed by Sarama Halder (wife of the present revisional applicant) and directed the revisional applicant (opposite party in that case) to pay maintenance to the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month. In this revisional application the appellant/husband has prayed for an order setting aside the impugned order of the S.D.J.M. on the ground that the same is illegal and unsustainable.

(2.) The relationship of husband and wife between the parties is undisputed. Admittedly, the applicant married the respondent-Sara ma, according to Hindu rites. The case of the petitioner-wife before the learned Magistrate was that the opposite party-husband used to press her for fetching money from her father but her father being a poor man and unable to meet the demand, her husband and her in-laws used to torture her in various ways including physical assault, stoppage of supply of food, etc. At last on 26.9.1954 her husband assaulted her and took off her ornaments and left the house. She then lodged a diary at Kulpi P.S. on 27.9.1994. Thereafter, on 1.11.1994 her in-laws picked up quarrel with her and drove her from her matrimonial house after physically assaulting her. Since then she had been living in her father's house. Thereafter, on 28.12.1994 she filed a complaint against her husband and in-laws under Section 498-A, I.P.C. before the Court of S.D.J.M. who sent it to police under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. for investigation and report. During the investigation of the case by police her husband obtained her signature on a paper on the plea that a mutual settlement would be effected. She has since been living in her father's house with great hardship as she has no income of her own and her father being a poor man has no means to provide her maintenance. Her husband is a solvent person having landed properties and having a monthly income of Rs. 3,000/- (three thousand) from his engagement as a contractor, she has prayed for an order of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 1,000/- every month against the opposite party.

(3.) The opposite party-husband filed a written petition denying all the material allegations and contending that the petitioner was a woman of loose character and had illicit connection with a young man, named, Aloke Halder of Gopal Nagar Village. On 21st May , 1994 she left her house taking away with him gold ornaments and good quality garments worth Rs. 2,000/-. The opposite party tried to take her back in vain. He then filed a complaint before the Court of S.D.J.M. on 4.6.1994 which was sent to the O.C., Kulpi P.S. under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for investigation and report. During investigation of that case the police officer-in-charge called both the parties to the P.S. on 8.12.1994 and got a deed of settlement executed by them. Both of them put their signatures thereon voluntarily. As per the terms of this compromise deed the opposite party was to provide maintenance to the wife up to 8.1.1995 on which date he would have to pay Rs. 10,000/- to the petitioner as maintenance for her whole life and also to return to her the furniture and utensils which her father gave to her as dowry during her marriage whereupon the marital ties between them would come to an end and all litigations filed by both would be withdrawn. Accordingly, the petitioner-wife came to the house of the opposite party to live with him again, but before expiry of the above date, on 31.12.1994, the father of the petitioner took the petitioner from the house of the opposite party after giving a written undertaking. As per the said deed of mutual compromise, the opposite party deposited cash of Rs. 10,000/- and various other articles as per the agreement before the O.C., Kulpi P.S. on 11.1.1995 and the O.C. gave a receipt to the opposite party after receiving the same. But even after this the petitioner-wife filed this false petition for maintenance dated 31.1.1995 and also a criminal case under Section 498-A of I.P.C. The petitioner had no problem regarding her maintenance since she was living with the said Aloke Halder whereas the opposite party's financial condition was not at all good as he used to earn his livelihood as a day labourer and under all these circumstances the maintenance petition was liable to be dismissed.