SUKLA MUKHERJEE Vs. AMBARENDU NARAYAN MUKHERJEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Ss. 397, 401 and 482, Cr. P.C., heard as contested application, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the judgment delivered by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, 6th Court, Sealdah, in Case No. M-7 of 1984, so far as her prayer for getting maintenance from her husband is concerned.

(2.) The petitioner-wife filed an application against her husband, the opposite party No. 1, under S. 125, Cr. P.C. for her maintenance and maintenance of her two daughters. Her case was that she was married with the opposite party No. 1 on 15-4-1975 according to Hindu rites. With a short period of the marital life, the husband began to torture the petitioner both physically and mentally. The husband demanded money through the petitioner from her father. After four months of the marriage, the husband drove out the petitioner from his house without any cause and asked her not to come back. At the intervention of the petitioner's father, the matter was settled and the petitioner was taken to the house of her husband. The husband assaulted the petitioner mercilessly very often and even asked her to commit suicide. In Feb. 1980, the opposite party No. 1 drove away again the petitioner from his house after assaulting her. The petitioner took shelter in the house of her father with her children. At the intervention of the brother and father of the petitioner, the matter was again settled mutually and the petitioner was taken to her husband's house. Two daughters and a son were born out of the wedlock of the petitioner with the opposite party No. 1. The husband kept the son with him. On 23-12-1983, the petitioner along with her two daughters went to her father's house. It was decided that the opposite party No. 1 would go to her father's house on 25-12-1983. Accordingly, on 25-12-1983, the opposite party No. 1 went to the house of the petitioner's father and took lunch there. At about 2 p.m. on 25-12-1983, when the husband-opposite party No. 1 was about to leave the house of the petitioner's father, he suddenly took his shoe and assaulted the petitioner and asked her not to return to his house. All attempts for mutual settlements failed thereafter. As such, the petitioner filed the petition under S. 125 Cr. P.C., claiming maintenance at the rate of Rs. 400/- for herself and at the rate of Rs. 400/- for her two daughters per month on alleging that the opposite party No. 1 was an Assistant Director of the Bureau of Applied Economics and Statistics, Government of West Bengal, and drew salary of Rs. 1,600/- per month.

(3.) The case was contested by the opposite party No. 1 by filing a written objection wherein all the material allegations by the petitioner were denied. It was alleged that the opposite party No. 1 went to bring back the petitioner to his house and that the father and the elder brother of the petitioner instigated the petitioner not to come with him. It was also alleged that the opposite party No. 1 remitted money to the petitioner by money order for her expenses and that the money order was refused.