Mohammed Irfan Hussain Farooqui v. Nazneen Irfan Hussain Farooqui

vai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION by VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL Date: 2023.12.14 14:51:29 +0530 VASANT ANANDRAO IDHOL CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.401 OF 2023 Mohd.Irfan Hussain Farooqui ...Applicant V/s.

Nazeen Irfan Hussain Farooqui & Anr.

...Respondents

Mr.Mohd. Quis Shakil Ahmed for the Applicant. Mrs.Nazeen Irfan Hussain Farooqui - Respondent No.1 present in Court.

Mrs.M.R. Tidke, APP for the State - Respondent No.2. CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 8 TH DECEMBER , 2023.

P.C. :- 1.

This Criminal Revision Application is filed by the husband challenging the order of remand passed by the Sessions Court, Dindoshi, Mumbai.

2.

By a judgment and order dated 30 August 2023, the Sessions Court by its order quashed and set aside the judgment and order dated 8 September 2017 passed by the Trial Court, and directed the Trial Court to deposit 60% of the arrears of maintenance before the Trial Court within two months. The Respondents were granted liberty to withdraw the amount, if the amount deposited by 1/3

the Applicant before the Trial Court. Learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the outstanding amount at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per month as of today is Rs.19,00,000/-, but however the Applicant has already deposited a sum of Rs.6,26,000/-. He further submits that the said amount of Rs.6,26,000/- has already been withdrawn by Respondent No.1. Respondent No.1, who is present in Court submits that the said amount of Rs.6,26,000/- was withdrawn in the year 2019.

3.

The order under challenge is the order of remand by the Appellant Court to the Trial Court, with a condition that the Applicant should deposit deposit 60% of the arrears of maintenance before the Trial Court within two months from the date of remand. The amount of maintenance granted by the Trial Court was Rs.2,500/- per month to each of the two children of the Applicant and Respondent No.1. Further the amount of Rs.10,000/- towards the maintenance of wife and further Rs.5,000/- towards the rent for accommodation. 60% amount of Rs.20,000/- would roughly come to Rs.12,000/-. It appears that the said amount has been in arrears for quite some time as of now. Therefore, the Appellate Court rightly directed the Applicant to deposit 60% of the said amount.

4.

I find no perversity in the impugned order. Hence no case is made out to interfere with the impugned judgment and order. The 2/3

Criminal Revision Application is dismissed.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.) 3/3