LAWS(CAL)-2006-5-35

TAPASH KUMAR PAUL Vs. SOMA PAL

Decided On May 05, 2006
TAPASH KUMAR PAUL Appellant
V/S
SOMA PAL Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) filed by the husband petitioner is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.9.03 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 13th Court, South 24-Parganas at Alipore in Criminal Motion No. 436/01 thereby allowing the application under Section 125 of the Code filed by the Opposite Party (in short O.P.) wife after setting aside the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Sealdah in Misc. Case No. 45/2000 dismissing the application filed by the wife under Section 125 of the Code.

(2.) During pendency of the present revisional application, the O.P. wife, on 24.4.05 married one Partha Bhattacharya and the husband petitioner also obtained a decree for divorce against the wife from the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, 9th Court, Alipore on 4th September, 2004 in Matrimonial Suit No. 48/01. The Husband petitioner accordingly filed the application being CRAN No. 11/06 thereby praying for modifying the order dated 19.11.03 and 19.1.04 passed by this Court and also for setting aside the order dated 12.9.03 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and for dismissing the Misc. Execution Case No. 29/03 pending in the trial Court.

(3.) As the application being CRAN No. 11/06 has been filed by the husband petitioner supported by affidavit disclosing subsequent events, I intend to dispose of both the revisional application being CRR No. 2458 of 2003 and CRAN No. 11/06 as I think that the High Court is competent enough to consider the subsequent events when attention of the High Court has been drawn by the husband by filing the application supported by affidavit and there is no need of referring the matter back to the learned Court below for decision exercising power under Section 127 of the Code. In order to avoid multiplicity of proceeding this Court is competent enough to exercise the powers of Section 127 of the Code considering the subsequent events on the basis of application filed by the husband.