JUDGMENT :

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

2. This is an application filed under Section 397/401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 challenging the Judgment and Order dated 10.04.2023 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Barpeta in F.C. (Crl.) Case No.250/2022 directing the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs.5,000/-(Rupees Five thousand) only per month to the respondent towards the monthly maintenance.

3. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent as a first party filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. before the learned Family Court, Barpeta alleging interaliathat the respondent entered into marriage with the petitioner on 06.08.2017 according to Muslim Sariyat by executing Kabin-Nama. But, after six months of their marriage, the petitioner started torturing her mentally and physically and also demanded an amount of Rs.3 Lakhs along with some wooden furniture. Finally, on 02.02.2021 the present respondent was driven out of her matrimonial house and thereafter, she took shelter in her parental house. It is further alleged that since the day she left her matrimonial house, the petitioner has not provided her maintenance in spite of the fact that she has no source of income and at present she is totally dependent upon her father.

4. On the other hand, the petitioner is a Civil Engineer and only son of the parent. The petitioner earns about Rs.50,000/-to 60,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand to Sixty thousand) only per month from his service in a Construction Company and apart from that he earns from his landed property located at Kalgachia, Howly as well as in Guwahati. Considering all sources, the petitioner earns about Rs. 80,000/-to 90,000/-(Rupees eighty thousand to ninety thousand) per month. So, the petitioner can provide a maintenance of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand) only per month to the respondent.

5. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. R. Ali has submitted that the respondent never maintained peaceful conjugal life with the present petitioner. She went to her parental house on 02.02.2021 willfully along with her father. Thereafter, the petitioner and his parents tried to bring her back from her parental house, but she denied every time and asked the petitioner to give divorce. On 03.10.2021, the respondent’s father decided to settle the matter amicably, however, in the same sitting the uncles of the respondent’s attacked the petitioner to kill him. After that the petitioner sent a pleader’s notice through his Advocate to the respondent on 03.03.2022, where, he asked the respondent to come back to resume conjugal life, but, no reply was given by the respondent.

6. He also submitted that, though, the petitioner was Graduate in engineering, but, at present he is unemployed and totally dependent upon his retired father. Thus, the petitioner is not in a position to pay any maintenance to the respondent and he is still willing to continue his marital life with the respondent.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, as the respondent had left the matrimonial house willfully, and thus, she is not at all entitle to get any maintenance as per proviso under Section 125 (4) Cr.P.C. He further submitted that the learned Principal Judge Family Court, Barpeta did not consider any assets and liabilities of the parties before passing the Judgment and Order in spite of the guidelines provided by the Hon’ble Apex Court. Further, it is submitted that there is no evidence that the petitioner had tortured the respondent rather he was trying to resume their conjugal life and to that effect he also issued a pleaders notice.

8. Although, it is a fact that the petitioner has done Graduation in engineering, but, at present he is working in a school and not in a position to make any payment as per the order of the learned Principal Judge, Barpeta. Thus, the learned counsel for t