##PAGE1##

1

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

APPELLATE SIDE

Present: - HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS).

CRR 4005 of 2023

With

IA No. CRAN 5 of 2026

SHAMPA DAS

VS.

SUKHENDU NANDI

For the Petitioner : Mr. Debasish Kar (via V.C.),

Mr. Husen Mustafi, Adv.

Ms. Paramita Mukherjee,Adv.

Ms. Sahana Parvin, Adv.

Ms. Rimi Sil,Adv.

For the Opposite party : Mr. Subhadeep Chatterjee,Adv.

Ms Arpita Kundu,Adv.

Mr. Bithin Mandal,Adv.

Mr. Nilabha Roy,Adv.

Heard On : 07.05.2026

Judgment on : 18.05.2026

Uploaded on : 18.05.2026

CHAITALI CHATTERJEE (DAS), J.

1. This revisional application has been filed against the order and judgment and

order dated September 11, 2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast

Track 1st Court at Barrackpore in Criminal Revision No.555 of 2022 arising out

Page 1 of 6

2

of an order dated 24.2.2022 passed by the learned 4^th Court, Judicial Magistrate,

Barrackpore in M. case No. 914 of 2021, whereby the quantum of maintenance

has been reduced to Rs.4, 000/- from Rs.8,000/-.

2. It is the case of the petitioner being wife of the opposite party no.2 that she filed

an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure claiming

maintenance of Rs.15, 000/- per month for the child and the proceeding was

initiated before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 4^th Court at

Barrackpore.

3. Before the learned Magistrate, the husband did not turn up despite receiving

service and the learned Court of Magistrate considering the evidence adduced by

the wife and considering the income as stated by the present petitioner passed

the order of maintenance to the extent of Rs.8,000/-. The opposite party after

that filed revisional application challenging the said ex parte order in respect of

filing any application for setting aside such ex parte party and the learned

revisional Court only considering the submission advanced by the learned

advocate for the petitioner drastically reduced the amount to Rs.4,000/- from

Rs.8,000/-.

4. The learned counsel representing the petitioner submits that the revisional Court

failed to consider that the learned Magistrate after being satisfied about the

service of notice upon the opposite party/respondent passed such proceeding ex

parte order and the revisional Court did not consider that aspect of the matter

when the opposite party no.2 on affidavit stated before the revisional Court that

he has not served with the notice.

5. It is further submitted that the husband initially, did not suppress his income

and, therefore, did not challenge any application for setting aside the ex parte

order in respect of that directly challenge the ex parte order with the false and

3

fabricated case. Therefore, it is submitted that the order passed by the

revisional Court is bad in law and without giving any scope to the petitioner to

place her case passed the said order refusing the amount to Rs.4,000/-, which

would otherwise cause serious prejudice to the petitioner.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel representing the opposite party/husband submits

that he did not serve any notice as there is no legal bar to challenge the ex parte

order in revisional Court. Before the revisional Court, despite having full

knowledge and initially though appeared, the petitioner chose not to turn up the

learned Court, therefore, had to pass the order on the basis of the available

materials before the learned Court. The petitioner herein did not file any

document in respect of contention regarding the necessary of such huge amount

of money is the claim of maintenance was only for the manner of torture.

7. The present petitioner despite having full knowledge about of date of hearing did

not turn up. The Opposite Party is not an engineer as portrayed but he is a

mechanic and the income has been shown, which is absolutely infated on the

basis of which such payment of Rs.8,000/- was allowed and it causes severe

hardship to the Opposite Party. Though, in view of the interim order continue to

pay such amount and the Learned Division