PARVEX JILANI Vs. RUKHASANA PARVEEN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is at the instance of the wife and is directed against the judgment and order dated November 29, 2010 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Calcutta in Misc. Case No.84 of 2009 under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.

(2.) The wife / opposite party herein instituted the aforesaid maintenance case under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. 1973, contending, inter alia, that the marriage between the parties was solemnised on April 22, 2007 and that after marriage they lived together at 9/D, Ripon Square, 3 rd Floor, Kolkata-700016. The wife was subjected to torture and ill-treatment by the husband and her in-laws demanding more dowry. Ultimately, on July 1, 2008 she was driven out from her in-law s house as she failed to bring more dowry. Under the compelling circumstances, she took shelter at her father s house and she is defendant on her mother and brothers. She lodged a criminal case against the husband under Sections 498A and 406 of the I.P.C. on October 15, 2009 before the Park Street P.S. She has no source of income, while the opposite party earns Rs.10,000/- per month. Under the circumstance, she claimed a sum of Rs.3,500/- per month as maintenance.

(3.) The husband / petitioner herein contested the said case under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. by filing a written objection denying the material allegations contained in the application for maintenance. His specific case is that though the marriage between the two was duly solemnised, the allegation of torture and ill-treatment upon her by the husband and other in-laws was totally false. The allegation of driven out was totally false. In fact, on July 1, 2008, the wife and her relations created a scene in front of the house of the husband and ultimately, the men of the wife assaulted the husband and other members and for that reason, the husband filed a case under Sections 324/114 of the IPC against the wife and her men on July 1, 2008. The said case is pending. On the same day, the petitioner left her matrimonial home along with her belongings and the parties began to live separately. The wife also lodged a case under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC against the husband and both the cases are no pending before the Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Calcutta. The husband tried to reconcile the matter in vain and so, ultimately, he divorced his wife by pronouncement of talaque thrice and he sent maintenance, mahr and other expenses by a cheque along with the talaquenama by Registered Post with A/D but the wife refused to take the same and as such, the said talaquenama along with other particulars were returned to him with the remark not claimed . At present, he is earning Rs.4,500/- per month and his income is not to the tune of Rs.10,000/- as claimed by the wife. So, the application should be dismissed.