SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

NISITH KUMAR BATBYAL
Sm. Dipali Mallick – Appellant
Versus
Nirmal Mallick – Respondent


Counsel for the parties:
For the Petitioner - Mr. inderajit Mandal, Advocate.
For the Respondent – M/s. Maitreyee Ghosh, Amal Pal, Advocates.

JUDGMENT

Nisitu Kumar Batabyal, J. - This Criminal revision arises out of an application under sections 397/40l/482of the Cr. P.C. and is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.12.1991 passed by Shri R. Mukhopadhyay, the learned 2nd Additional Session Judge at Barasat, North 24-Parganas in Criminal Revision No. 59 of 1991 reversing the Judgment and order dated 17.1.1991 passed by Shri M.M. Ghosh, learned S.D.J.M., Barrackpore in Misc. Case No. M 15 of 1998 under Section 125 of the Cr. P.C. granting maintenance at the rate of Rs. 300/- (Rupees three hundred only) per month to the wife.

2. The case of the revision petitioner is that she was married with the O.P. No. 1 according to Hindu Rites on 12 March, 1986. From the very beginning of their marriage life, she noticed that her husband had illicit connection with his aunt who resided in the same quarter. The petitioner objected to such indecent conduct but the O.P. threatened her and used filthy language against her. The husband did not allow her to move out of the room and used to spent his time mostly in the association of his aunt. The petitioner visited her father's house in May, 1986 but when she returned, the O.P. No

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top