Sanjay Paswan, Son Of Sri Kailash Paswan vs State of Bihar

Q: Key Points

Conclusion of the Judgment: The impugned interim maintenance order dated 02.02.2023, directing payment of Rs. 20,000/- per month plus arrears, was set aside due to the Trial Court's failure to obtain affidavits of assets and liabilities from both parties, preventing a proper financial assessment.[28][29] Parties were directed to file affidavits of assets and liabilities within three weeks from communication of the order to the Family Court, with no further adjournments permitted.[30] The Trial Court was instructed to reassess and determine the quantum of interim maintenance based on these affidavits.[31] Pending final disposal, the petitioner-husband must pay Rs. 10,000/- per month exclusively for the maintenance of the minor son.[32] The revision petition was disposed of accordingly.[33]

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Pat) 747

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Bibek Chaudhuri
Sanjay Paswan, Son Of Sri Kailash Paswan – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr.Pawan Kumar, Advocate, Mr.Dhaneshwar Vashist, Advocate, Ms.Diksha, Advocate, Mr.Raghav Vatsa, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr.Narendra Kumar Singh, APP, Mr.Raghvendra Kumar, Advocate, Ms.Simran Thakur, Advocate

Judgement Key Points

Conclusion of the Judgment:

The impugned interim maintenance order dated 02.02.2023, directing payment of Rs. 20,000/- per month plus arrears, was set aside due to the Trial Court's failure to obtain affidavits of assets and liabilities from both parties, preventing a proper financial assessment.[28][29]

Parties were directed to file affidavits of assets and liabilities within three weeks from communication of the order to the Family Court, with no further adjournments permitted.[30]

The Trial Court was instructed to reassess and determine the quantum of interim maintenance based on these affidavits.[31]

Pending final disposal, the petitioner-husband must pay Rs. 10,000/- per month exclusively for the maintenance of the minor son.[32]

The revision petition was disposed of accordingly.[33]

ORDER :

Bibek Chaudhuri, J.

1. The petitioner is the husband of Opposite Party No. 1. Their marriage was solemnized on 14^th of December, 2015. The Opposite Party No. 1 filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for maintenance allowance, alleging, inter alia, that after solemnization of her marriage with the petitioner, it was consummated and in the wedlock, she gave birth to a male child. It is alleged that after marriage, the petitioner and his relatives demanded Rs. 10 Lakhs as dowry, which she denied. It is further alleged that at the time of marriage father of the Opposite Party had given Rs. 15 lakshs in cash and Rs. 3 lakhs in the account of the brother of the petitioner on 19.05.2015. Again, on 23.05.2015, Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 49,500/- in the account as well as Rs. 5,00,000/- was given to the father of the petitioner. It is also alleged that in the night of 09.02.2019, they have attempted to immolate her but fortunately her brother Rahul and Lal Babu Paswan reached her matrimonial house on motrorcycle and hearing her screaming voice all the accused persons had fled away and thereafter she was admitted in the clinic for treatment. It is f