RAHIMA BIBI Vs. ABDUL ODUD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Uday Shankar Chattopadhyay, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, files affidavit of service together with copy of notice sought to be served upon the State of West Bengal as well as Abdul Odud despatched by registered post on 30.7.2008. Let the same be kept with the record. Heard Mr. Chattopadhyay, learned Advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Mallick, learned Advocate appearing for the State.

(2.) The petitioner herein, Rahima Bibi, initiated a criminal action long back in the year 1984 under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the O.P. No. 1, Abdul Odud, which was registered as M.R. Case No. 147 of 1984. Thereafter, the O.P. No. 1 given her Talak. Ultimately, the award, granted in favour of the present petitioner, was put in execution as the O.P. No. 1, as her husband, could not comply with the direction of Court to pay maintenance. A distress warrant was issued against him. Chased by the distress warrant, the O.P. No. 1 proposed the petitioner that he would remarry her and allow her to stay with him as his wife in case she withdraws the proceedings. He also proposed that he would gift some landed properties to the petitioner in order to secure her future maintenance. A compromise petition was filed to that effect and, as a consequence, that maintenance proceeding was withdrawn. Before the proceeding was withdrawn on compromise, the O.P. No. 1, however, remarried the petitioner and executed a Deed of Gift in respect of 161/2 decimals of land on 5th August, 1991. The moment the proceeding was withdrawn on compromise, the O.P. No. 1 had gone to his second wife leaving the petitioner alone and informed her in writing that he has given her Talak. In order to maintain herself, the petitioner had gone to the landed property, which was gifted to her by the O.P. No. 1 on 5th August, 1991, but found that the said land was already transferred by the O.P. No. 1 on 29.7.1991 in favour of his second wife.

(3.) The petitioner felt dejected and defrauded. She relying on the action taken by the O.P. No. 1, withdrew the maintenance proceeding, which was in her favour, and acknowledged the gift treating the same to be a genuine one. She did not find place in her matrimonial house. She did not get any maintenance, whatsoever, from the O.P. No. 1. She, finding no alternative, knocked at the doors of the Court and filed a petition of complaint under sections 417/420 of the Indian Penal Code against the O.P. No. 1, which was registered as C.R. Case No. 58-A of 1992 in the Court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Lalbagh. The case was, ultimately, tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Additional Court, Lalbagh, Murshidabad. Upon considering the evidence recorded in course of trial, the learned Magistrate found the O.P. No. 1 guilty of offence under section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and convicted him. He sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and directed him to pay a compensation of Rs. 20,000/- to the present petitioner under section 357(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.