Rahim Ali Prodhani S/O Late Akbar Ali Prodhani vs State of Assam Rep. by The PP

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Gau) 23

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
Malasri Nandi, J.
Rahim Ali Prodhani S/O Late Akbar Ali Prodhani – Petitioner
Versus
The State of Assam Rep. by The PP, And Anr. – Respondents
Crl.Rev.P./105 of 2022
Decided On : 09-01-2023

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. A Rahman

Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 401, 397, 125 – Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents – Power of revision – Calling for records to exercise powers of revision – Learned counsel petitioner – Learned counsel respondent well learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State respondent – Held, Court has awarded maintenance petitioner and her daughter amounting – Cr.P.C. has been enacted to achieve a social object prevent vagrancy and destitution and to provide speedy remedy to deserted or divorced wife minor children and infirm parents in term of food clothing and shelter and minimum needs of one’s life –Court expressed social justice specially enacted to protect women children and it gives effect to fundamental rights and natural duties of a man to maintain his wife children and parents when they are unable to maintain themselves – Court approach of learned Principal Judge Family Court completely justified and legal and there is no material illegality or irregularity in impugned judgment – Revision is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. A. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.K. Ahmed, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2 as well as Mr. P.S. Lahkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/respondent No.1.

2. The petitioner/husband has preferred an application under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C., 1973 against the judgment and order dated 22.11.2021 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court Dhubri in F.C. Crl. Case No. 67/2019, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.3,000/- to the respondent No. 2 and Rs.2,000/- for her daughter as monthly maintenance.

3. Before the learned trial court the wife/respondent No. 2 gave an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. stating that she was married with the revisionist according to the Muslim Shariat law. After marriage, she went to the house of her husband and performed her matrimonial obligation. A daughter namely, Rifa Saniya Prodhani was born out of their wedlock. In the year 2019, her husband and his family members demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) as dowry and on account of non-ful-fillment of dowry, she was driven out from her matrimonial home along with her daughter. Finding no alternative, she took shelter in the house of her parents along with her daughter.

4. It is further alleged that since then the petitioner neither visited her nor provided any sort of maintenance towards them. The respondent has no source of income of her own. On the other hand, the petitioner is a businessman by profession having sufficient landed properties and other source of income from which he is earning Rs.30,000/-per month. Hence, the respondent/wife was compelled to file a petition before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhubri seeking maintenance allowance of Rs.5,000/- each for herself and her daughter.

5. The husband as opposite party has submitted his written statement before the learned trial court wherein he denied all the allegations made by the respondent/wife. But admitted the factum of marriage between the parties and birth of a female child namely Rifa Saniya Prodhani. According to the present petitioner/husband, he is a daily wage earner with a meager income of Rs.4,000/- per month and he has to maintain his parents, sister and brother, who are depending upon him, as such he is unable to provide separate maintenance towards the respondent No.2 and her daughter.

6. Before the learned trial court the respondent/wife has adduced evidence as PW1 supported by PW2. On the other hand, the petitioner/husband did not turn up to cross examine the witnesses resultantly the evidence in affidavit remain unshattered at vital points that during her conjugal life, she has been physically tortured by the petitioner on demand of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lac only) and on her failure to pay the said amount, she has been driven out from her matrimonial home along with her daughter.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has challenged the order of the learned trial court, dated 22.11.2021, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay monthly maintenance to his wife and daughter amounting to Rs.5,000/- per month without considering the evidence on record but the petitioner being a day labourer he has no ability to provide maintenance separately to his wife and daughter as granted by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Dhubri and has prayed to reduce the maintenance amount from Rs.5,000/- to Rs.2,500/- per month.

8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/wife has vehemently objected to the prayer of the petitioner by stating that considering the high price of the essential commodities, Rs.5,000/-is not enough to maintain herself and her daughter. It is also submitted that the daughter of the petitioner is a school going child and money is required for purchasing books and school uniform and other required items.

9. I have gone through the judgment passed by the learned Principal Judge, Fami