Indu Bhushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No 115 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2021 Thana- NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE District- Nawada ====================================================== Indu Bhushan Kumar Son of Jagdish Chaudhary Resident of MohallaMallahchak, Near Pani Tanki, P.S-Jahanabad, Distt-Jahanabad, Bihar. Presently at Reliance Green Township, Sector-09, 165 E, P.S.-City C Division, Distt.-Jamnagar, Gujarat-361142 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Priyanka Kumari Wife of Indu Bhushan Kumar, D/O Rambriksh Chaudhary Resident of Chaudhary Nagar Par Nawada, P.S.-Nawada, Distt.-Nawada, Bihar ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr Somesh Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 30-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2 This revision petition has been preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved with the order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nawada in Maintenance Case No 98 of 2021 whereby the application submitted by the petitioner under Section 125 (4) of Cr P C has been rejected.

3 Undisputedly, Opposite Party No 2 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.115 of 2024 dt.30-07-2024 2/2 4 After filing the application for maintenance,by Opposite Party No 2, an application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 125 (4) of Cr P C on the ground that Opposite Party No 2-wife is residing separately without any reasonable cause. Therefore, her maintenance petition filed under Section 125 of Cr P C is not maintainable.

5 The objection made by the petitioner in his application submitted under Section 125 (4) of Cr P C is purely a matter of evidence which has to be proved before the Principal Judge, Family Court at the time of recording of the evidence of the parties. Petitioner has the opportunity to establish this fact before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at the time of recording of evidence of the parties. Therefore, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court has rightly rejected the application of the petitioner filed under Section 125 (4) of the Cr P C.

6 I do not find any irregularity/illegality in the order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court. Accordingly, this revision petition is dismissed.

(Arvind Singh Chandel, J) M.E.H./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 01.08.2024 Transmission Date 01.08.2024