Patna High CourtCR. REV./179/2023disposed

Nilam Devi v. Amit Roy

2024-09-06Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Chandel3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.179 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-0 Thana- District- Purnia ====================================================== NILAM DEVI WIFE OF AMIT KUMAR ROY, B/O LATE PANKAJ ROY (YADAV), D/O SAKALDEO YADAV R/O VILLAGE- RANIPATRA, P.O.- RANIPATRA, P.S.- MUFFASIL, RANIPATRA, DISTRICT- PURNEA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

AMIT ROY SON OF HARIHAR ROY R/O MOHALLA- KHUSKIBAGH, PANKAJ MARKET INFRONT OF ADITYA HOTEL, P.O. AND P.S.- SADAR, DISTRICT- PURNEA 2.

HARIHAR ROY SON OF LATE DWARIKA YADAV R/O MOHALLAKHUSKIBAGH, PANKAJ MARKET INFRONT OF ADITYA HOTEL, P.O. AND P.S.- SADAR, DISTRICT- PURNEA ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bipin Kumar,Adv For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 06-09-2024 Re:-I.A. No. 02 of 2024 The Interlocutory Application has been filed for condonation of delay in filing the revision application, which is barred by 2 years 11 months and 16 days'.

2. For the reasons stated in the application, delay in filing the revision application is condoned.

3. Accordingly, Interlocutory Application stands allowed.

Cr. Rev. No. 179 of 2023 Heard.

2. Perused the impugned order as well as documents

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.179 of 2023(4) dt.06-09-2024 2/3 annexed to the petition.

3. Vide impugned order dated 06.03.2020, the learned Family Court rejected the petition for grant of interim maintenance submitted by the petitioner-applicant.

4. Perusal of the impugned order clearly shows that after examining the five witnesses of the applicant-wife, the application for grant of interim maintenance has been submitted by the wife and after considering the statements of witnesses, the Family Court rightly arrived at the conclusion that petitioner is unable to establish the fact that she is legally wedded wife of the O.P. and on this ground only, the application for grant of interim maintenance has been rejected.

5. At the time of argument, it is submitted by the learned counsel that since father-in-law of the petitioner is also made a party and she also claims the interim maintenance from father-in-law, but this fact has not been considered by the Family Court vide deciding application for interim maintenance.

6. Along with this revision petition the petitioner neither placed on record the application submitted under section 125 Cr.P.C. nor application for grant of interim maintenance. Therefore at this stage, it cannot be said that she claimed interim maintenance from her father-in-law also.

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.179 of 2023(4) dt.06-09-2024 3/3

7. Further considering the fact that till 06.03.2020 five witnesses of the applicant already examined by the Family Court and as stated by the learned counsel still the matter is pending before the concerned Family Court, it would be appropriate to dispose of the this revision petition directing the concerned Family Court to conclude the proceeding of concerned Maintenance Case i.e. Maintenance Case No. 60/2019 as early as possible, in accordance with law.

8. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with directing to the concerned Family Court to conclude the proceeding and pass the final order as early as possible probably within a period of six months from today in accordance with relevant rules and law.

9. Accordingly, with the above directing thus this revision petition is disposed of.

(Arvind Singh Chandel , J) krishnakant/- U T