Calcutta High CourtCRR/1181/2011disposed

Prodyut Chakraborty v. State Of West Bengal & ANR

2023-09-21Hon'Ble Justice Ananya Bandyopadhyay3 pages

21.09.2023 24 & 25 cm CRR 1181 of 2011 With CRR 178 of 2011 In the matter of : Prodyut Chkaraborty.

.... for the petitioner.

Mr. Sourav Chatterjee Mr. Soumya Nag .... for the petitioner.

Ms. Faria Hossain Mr. Anand Keshari ... for the State.

In Re: CRR 1181 of 2011 The notice was served upon the petitioner as per the report of the Inspector-in-Charge, Kotwali Police Station, KPD, Nadia. The notice could not be served upon the opposite party No.2 as per the report of the Officer-in-Charge, Dhubulia Police Station District Nadia. Let the said report be kept on record. The report submitted by the Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia dated 19.09.2023 stated that the M.R. Case No. 140(IV) had been disposed of on 09.09.2011. Let the same be kept on record.

Under such circumstances, the instant revisional application has become infructuous and disposed of. In Re: CRR 178 of 2011

The instant revisional application has been filed against judgment and order dated 27th September, 2010 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in Criminal Motion No. 94 of 2007 which was pending before the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Krishnagar, Nadia thereby setting aside the judgment and order dated 30th April, 2007 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in M.R. Case No. 146(IV)/2003 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and directing the petitioner to pay maintenance to the opposite party No. 2 at the rate of Rs. 900/- per month and Rs. 350/- per month to the minor child of the opposite party No.2 from the date of filing of the case and further directing the petitioner to liquidate the arrear maintenance amount by four equal monthly installments to be paid by the 10th day of each month, first of which shall be payable in the month of October, 2010.

Perused the petition as well as the impugned order, this court does not find any infirmity or impropriety in the impugned order. Accordingly, this court is not inclined to interfere with the same.

Accordingly, the instant revisional application is dismissed.

Copy of the order be sent to the Department as well as trial court for information.

(Ananya Bandyopadhyay, J.)