(1.) The petitioner/husband has preferred this Revision Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.) against the order dated 31st January, 2012 passed by the Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Calcutta in Misc. Case No.108 of 2007 whereby and whereunder he rejected the applications under order VI Rule 17 C.P.C. filed by the petitioner/husband praying for amendment of the Written Objection and the application filed by him for re-cross-examination of P.W.1 and re-examination of O.P.W.1 and allowed the application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. filed by the wife/O.P. No.1 directing that husband/petitioner shall pay Rs.5,000/- per month towards maintenance to the O.P./wife and to pay a further sum of Rs.5,000/- to her towards the expenses of litigation.
(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the wife/O.P. No.1 filed an application for maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the Family Court, Calcutta for grant of maintenance of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) per month. It was stated in the application that the O.P. No.1 was married with the present petitioner on 2nd December, 2003 according to Hindu Rites and Ceremonies. After solemnization of the marriage, the O.P.No.1 went to her matrimonial home at Chandannagar on 03.12.2003. On 04.12.2003 in the night they closetted together but she was surprised to notice some abnormal behaviour of her husband. Her husband refused to share the bed with her and he compelled her to sleep on the floor. Although she stayed in her husband's house up to 12.12.2003 but her husband did not create any sexual relationship with her. The parents of her husband also ill-behaved with her and mentally tortured her. On 21st December, 2003 she was forced to go back to her paternal house being escorted by her father-in-law as her husband refused to accompany her.
(3.) The husband, i.e. the present petitioner, filed Written Objection, wherein he denied the allegations as alleged in the application. He contended that the O.P./wife was in the habit of picking up quarrel with his parents and also in the habit of visiting her father's house out of her own accord. She used to go to her father's house only to satisfy her lust with her pre-marital connection with 'telecaller'. After going to her father's house, she never returned except on the date for few hours in July, 2007 when she came to collect her belongings. He filed a Matrimonial Suit bearing No.208 of 2004 in the Court of Learned District Judge, Hooghly for restitution of conjugal rights but she declined such offer and preferred to stay at her father's house for enjoying her life with the alleged 'telecaller' with whom she had allegedly "husband-wife relation much prior to her alleged marriage with the O.P." It was further contended that the O.P./wife being highly educated earns several thousand rupees per month through tuition. Besides her family earns a lot from jewellery/goldsmith shop. On the other hand, he is a petty service holder having gross salary of Rs.21,000/- per month and his take home pay is Rs.12,000/- per month after statutory deduction. It is the further contention of the husband/petitioner that the O.P./wife left her matrimonial home voluntarily after executing an agreement and she took away all her belongings promising not to return again. He, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and also for a declaration of nullity of the marriage and for decree of divorce.