SUBRATA DEB Vs. RINA DEB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application directed against an order dated passed by the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Siliguri, in M. R. Case No. 66/95 under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure thereby directing the present petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 1,500/ - per month as maintenance to the present opposite party.

(2.) It appears that the opposite party herein filed a petition under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure - claiming maintennce for hereself at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- per month and Rs. 3,000/ - as expenses for the proceedings. The case of the present opposite party/wife in her application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is that she got married on 26.7.93 and about three months after marriage her husband and other in-laws started torture and ill-treatment, as a result of which she had to leave her matrimonial home. It was further alleged that the husband asked the wife to bring a sum of Rs. 1.5 lakh from her father and when she refused to comply of the said demand, her husband and other in-laws started torturing upon her. It was specifically alleged in the petition under section 125 Cr. PC that on 6.6.95 her husband and his relations poured kerosene oil on her body with an intention of setting fire on her. She some how managed to escape from the house early in the morning of 7.6.95 and thereafter she lodged a case under section 498A of the Indian Penal Code with Matigara police station. Since 7.6.95 the wife had been living with her parents and the husband neglected and refused to provide her any maintenance.

(3.) The present petitioner being the husband appeared and contested the said proceeding under section 125 Cr. P. C. by filing a show cause and denying all the allegations and averments made in the petition under section 125 Cr. PC. and contended that the opposite party/wife left her matrimonial home of her own volition and she is living separately without any just and sufficient cause and as such she is not entitled to get any maintenance from the petitioner. After taking evidence and on consideration of the materials placed before him the learned Magistrate by his order dated 29.9.96 allowed the said application under section 125 Cr. P. C. and directed the present petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 1,500/ - towards the maintenance of the opposite party/wife. Challenging the said order of the learned Magistrate the petitioner came up before this court in revision. It appears that the learned Magistrate totally disbelieved the allegations of torture and ill-treatment as alleged by the opposite party/wife in her application under section 125 Cr. P. C. In her application under section 125 Cr. P. C. it was the specific case of the opposite party that she was subjected to torture both physically and mentally at her matrimonial home by the husband and other in- laws. It is further stated by her that on 6.6.95 the situation became worse and on that date the husband of the opposite party and his relations with an intention to set fire poured kerosene oil on the body of the opposite party/wife but the opposite party some how managed to escape. The learned Megistrate disbelieved this allegation relying on the Ext. D, which is a letter written by the opposite party to her husband. From Ext. D is appears that the said letter was written by the opposite party to her husband from her father's house. On the day of alleged incident, i. e. , on 6.6.95 the opposite party/wife was very much at her parental house at Subhaspally where from she wrote the said letter. So the learned Megistrate observed that the opposite party failed to substantiate her allegation of setting fire on her body by the husband and other in-laws on 6.6.95. The learned Magistrate also disbelieved that the present petitioner/husband claimed an amount of Rs. 1.5 lakh from the father of the opposite party/wife. The learned Magistrate was of the view that both the parties manufactured concocted story of their sweat will to establish their respective case which have get no basis at all. So that point of physical and mental torture by the present petitioner and his relations upon the opposite party/wife at her matrimonial home have no basis at all and as such the said point was decided accordingly.