Janak Ram v. Sitamma And ANR.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION [ CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR] ** CRR/2/2020 Shri Janak Ram ... Petitioner
Versus
Sitamma and another ... Respondents Mr. S.C.Mishra, Advocate .. for the petitioner Ms. Babita Das, Advocate .. for the respondent no.1 March 16, 2022 [SR] Item No.2 Parties are represented by their respective counsel. The criminal revision application is taken up for hearing.
Heard learned counsel for both sides.
The present revisional application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C is at the instance of Shri Janak Ram being aggrieved by order of payment of maintenance of Rs.5000/- to his divorced wife along with litigation cost of Rs.10,000/- passed by the Judge, Family Court, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Port Blair in Misc.Case No.76 of 2017 on 14th February, 2019.
The facts that are necessary for determination of the present revisional application, in brief, is that Janak Ram and Sitamma were married on 10th August, 1978 according to Hindu rites and customs. Out of their wedlock, three children were born. Their marriage was dissolved by virtue of mutual consent divorce on 15th February, 1988. It has also come on record that the opposite party was working with the government of Andaman and Nicobar Islands and due to some circumstances and situation; she was discharged from the service without any pensionary benefits. The petitioner has retired from government service as Assistant Director (Admn). At present, his wife is getting only a destitute allowance of Rs.2500/- per month.
Now, after 27 years of divorce, the opposite party/wife has come up with an application under section 125 of the Cr.P.C claiming maintenance from her Ex-husband on the ground that she has no source of income to maintain herself. In the written objection, the Ex-husband, Janak Ram has brought an allegation of adultery that his wife was leading unchaste life for which the marriage was broken down. Therefore, he has contended that he is not bound to maintain his divorced wife, who lives unchaste and adulterous life.
The learned court below, after hearing both the parties, held that at present the opposite party/divorced wife indeed, has no source of income to maintain herself except destitute allowance of Rs.2500/- and thereby awarded maintenance allowance of Rs.5000/- from her Exhusband/petitioner.
From both the oral and documentary evidences which have come on record the present petitioner has failed to prove by cogent evidence that his divorced wife lived/live unchaste and adulterous life for which he is not bound to maintain his wife.
He has merely produced some photographs and which appear to be family photographs taken on some occasions. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the present opposite party being the divorced wife, and who never claimed any maintenance from her Ex-husband so long, she was able to maintain herself and is entitled to claim maintenance from her Ex-husband as nothing come on record to show that the opposite party Sitamma has remarried or has her own independent source of income. That part, this Court finds that the quantum of maintenance of Rs.5000/- per month does not appear to be excess or exorbitant and unreasonable. Rather, keeping in view the present inflated market, the amount of Rs.5000/- appears to be just and reasonable.
Therefore, this Court finds no infirmity in the order impugned. Accordingly, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order.
Accordingly, CRR/2/2020 is disposed of.
Connected application, if any, is disposed of. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.
There will be no order as to costs.
All parties to act in terms of the copy of the order downloaded from the official website of this Court. Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties, upon compliance of all formalities, on priority basis.
( Kesang Doma Bhutia, J. )