LAWS(J&K)-2022-1-13

RAAISHA Vs. SYED SUDHANSHU PANDAY

Decided On January 27, 2022
Raaisha Appellant
V/S
Syed Sudhanshu Panday Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Raaisha (minor) through her mother has challenged order dtd. 30/3/2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class (2nd Additional Munsiff), Srinagar (hereinafter referred to as "the Magistrate") in the proceedings under Sec. 488 of J&K Cr.P.C whereby the learned Magistrate has deferred the proceedings till the outcome of the civil suit in which question of paternity of the petitioner is in issue.

(2.) Before coming to the grounds urged in the instant revision petition, it would be apt to refer to the background facts leading to filing of this revision petition.

(3.) It appears that the minor petitioner through her mother filed a petition under Sec. 488 J&K Cr.P.C against the respondent herein claiming maintenance from him. In the said petition, it has been alleged that in the year 2010, when the respondent was holding the position of Finance Secretary in the Government of Jammu and Kashmir, he developed relationship with mother of the petitioner. It is further alleged that in the month of May 2010, the respondent converted to Islam, whereafter he entered into wedlock with mother of the petitioner on 8/5/2010 and out of the said wedlock, petitioner was born on 12/4/2011. It is also alleged that in the month of October, 2012, the respondent was deputed to Central Government and posted at New Delhi. The respondent shifted to the said place leaving the petitioner and her mother in lurch. It has been alleged that on 1/4/2013, the petitioner along with her mother visited the native place of the respondent at Lucknow where they came to know that the respondent was already a married man having wife and two children and it was also found that the respondent was practicing Hindu faith, as a result whereof, the marriage between the petitioner's mother and the respondent got automatically dissolved. It has been alleged that the petitioner and her mother were forced to leave Lucknow, whereafter, the respondent completely ignored the both. It is averred that the petitioner and her mother has filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the respondent, which is pending disposal before the Court of 1st Additional Munsiff, Srinagar. It is also averred that though the respondent did remit some maintenance amount in the bank account of the petitioner, yet the same is very meager. On these grounds, the petitioner has sought monthly maintenance of Rs.30,000.00 from the respondent.