Point of Law : It is seen that learned Court below committed no error or mistake while passing the judgment and order granting the maintenance to the respondent/1st party.

JUDGMENT :

Heard Mr. R. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent.

2. This is an application under Section 397/401 readwith Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, against the impugned judgment and order dated 01.07.2022, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, in FC (Crl) Case No. 303/2020, directing the present petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 5,000/-per month from the date of filing of the petition towards the maintenance allowance of the respondent.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent, as a 1st party, filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, claiming maintenance alleging inter alia that she entered into a marriage with the petitioner on 21.10.2018 as per Islamic Shariyat and after their marriage, they started living as a husband and wife. But, after few days of their marriage, the 2nd party/the present petitioner and his family members started torturing her mentally and physically demanding Rs. 2,00,000/-from her parental home. As she could not fulfill the demand, the 2nd party/present petitioner started torturing her severely and finally drove her out of her matrimonial home. Having no other alternative, she took shelter in her parental home and since the day she left her matrimonial house, the petitioner never inquired about her nor provided her any maintenance. The 1st party/present respondent has no source of income to maintain herself. On the other hand, the 2nd party/present petitioner is a retired teacher and apart from that, he has 5-6 Bighas of cultivable land along with a fishery and also has the other source of income and thus, he is earning around Rs. 45,000/-per month and accordingly, the respondent filed the petition praying for maintenance @ Rs. 10,000/- per month towards maintenance allowance.

4. The petitioner, as a 2nd party, contested the case and filed his Written Statement denying the case of the respondent. He has stated that after the death of her first wife, he married the respondent to look after him and his children from his first wife. The respondent also earlier got married twice and she has 2 (two) children from her former husband. The respondent was an aggressive and desperate lady and she wanted to bring her 2 (two) children from her former husband to the house of the petitioner and when the petitioner refused to accept her proposal, she started demanding her share in his house and property. Finally, the respondent left her matrimonial house without intimating the petitioner and took all the ornaments and cloths with her and thereafter she did not return home. She refused to return to her matrimonial house in spite of several request and attempt made by the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner also filed a suit for restoration of conjugal rights before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, as he is still ready to bring back the respondent. The petitioner further stated in his Written Statement that he is a retired teacher and drawing his pension @ Rs. 23,708/-per month and he has the responsibility of 2 (two) college going children and he himself is suffering from heart disease and diabetes. Thus, the petitioner is not in a position to pay maintenance separately to the respondent and accordingly, he prayed for dismissal of the petition. He also gave detailed monthly expenditure which is required for maintaining his children and himself and it is specifically stated that he has to spend a good amount of money towards his treatment.

5. The respondent/1st party adduced her evidence as P.W.-1 and in reply, the present petitioner also adduced his evidence as D.W.-1 and after hearing the arguments put forwarded by both sides and also on perusal of the evidence on record, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, passed the impugned judgment and order dated 01.07.2022 directing the petitioner to pay monthly ma