NABANITA DAS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the order dated 21.6.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Tamluk, Purba Medinipur in Misc. Case no. 266 of 2008 under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

(2.) IN the background of this revision the fact in gist is that the petitioner was married to O.P. No. 2 on 27.7.81 in accordance with Special Marriage Act. They had a very good relationship initially and out of the said wedlock two children were born. The O.P. No. 2 took loan and constructed a house. The O.P. No. 2 asked the petitioner to bring Rs. 35000/- from her father. The petitioner further paid it. Thereafter, the O.P. started torturing the petitioner for no reasons. The O.P. No. 2 stayed away from house at night and then the petitioner came to learn that he is having a relationship with one Anita Jana, wife of Sri Rabindra Nath Jana. The O.P. No. 2 pressurised the petitioner to accept the relationship of the petitioner with the said lady. He also pressurized the petitioner to sale the house which was in the name of the petitioner. Local Panchayet was informed and Salish held but he did not pay any heed to their decisions. The O.P. No. 2 did not look after his children and also failed to maintain the petitioner. The O.P. No. 2 is a bank employee and is having ancestral property and he was earning Rs. 6000/- to Rs. 6500/- p.m. He fraudulently took the signature of the petitioner on a blank paper as well as other blank pages. The petitioner filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The O.P. No. 2 tortured the petitioner both physically and mentally. So, the petitioner approached the Pradhan on 7.5.94. A Salish was called on 15.4.94 and 10.7.94. The O.P. undertook to maintain his family but he did not. The petitioner lodged a complaint before the Police under Section 498A of the IPC. The O.P. No. 2 is having an extramarital relationship with the said Anita Jana and he was caught redhanded by the local people. The O.P. No. 2 contested the said application filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and denied all material allegations. He subsequently did not appear in the proceedings. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Tamluk by order dated 2.11.95 was pleased to pass an interim order maintenance to the tune of Rs. 1000/- p.m. to the petitioner and her children. Thereafter, on 12.7.96, the learned court below passed an ex parte order directing the O.P. No. 2 to pay Rs. 1000/- p.m. to the petitioner and Rs. 750 each to the children. The O.P. No. 2 failed to pay such amount as per order of the learned court below. So, Misc. Exn. Case No. 21 of 1996 and 12 of 1996 were filed in 2003, the petitioner filed another petition under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the learned ACJM, Tamluk praying for enhancement on the ground that the children are studying in higher classes and market price has increased. The O.P. No. 2 has been promoted to the post of senior employee of U.B.I. and earns Rs. 12000/- p.m. The O.P. No. 2 contested application by filing written objection and denying all the materials contained therein.

(3.) THUS, no infirmity is noticed in the impugned order. But the justice will be met if the maintenance amount for the daughter is increased from Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 3000/- p.m. in view of the educational expenses of the daughter of the petitioner. It is not the case of the petitioner that the O.P. is not at all paying anything. No execution case is reported to be pending. So, I do not find any reasonable ground to saddle the O.P. No. 2 with the burden of paying arrear maintenance from the date of filing of the application. Accordingly, the criminal revision succeeds in part. The O.P. is directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 2250/- p.m. to the petitioner and @ Rs. 3000/- p.m. to her daughter. THUS, the revision stands disposed of. I pass no order as to costs. Urgent Photostat certified copies, if applied for, be supplied according to rules.