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

2021 Supreme(Tri) 96

S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY
Sankha Subhra Roy Choudhury – Appellant
Versus
Sarmistha Banik – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr. T.K. Deb, Advocate, for the Petitioner; Mr. J. Majumder, Adv., Mr. R. Datta, P.P, for the Respondent

JUDGMENT

[1] By means of filing this criminal revision petition, petitioner Sankha Subhra Roy Choudhury has challenged the judgment and order dated 01.04.2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Criminal Appeal 27 of 2018 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge remanded the case to the trial court with the following directions:

“17…………………………Having observed thus, I am of the considered opinion that the order so passed by the Ld. Trial Court is arbitrary and cannot sustain. Accordingly, the order dated 09/10/2018 passed by the Trial Court in Case No. CR 43 of 2016 stands set aside with direction to the Ld. Trial Court to record the evidence of the appellant petitioner namely, Sarmistha Banik in regard to the present source of income of the respondent No.1 in determining the quantum of maintenance to be awarded in favour of the Appellant Petitioner. Trial Court is also to accept the documentary evidence in regard to the income of Respondent No.1, if produced and proceed in the way, an application under section 125 of Cr. PC is disposed of and while disposing of the record, it must be borne in mind that acts of domestic violence upon the appellant by

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