##PAGE1##

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

RPFAM No.270 of 2022

Baikuntha Mohapatra (cid:0)«(cid:0)(cid:17) Petitioner

Mr. S.K. Sethi, Advocate on behalf of Mr. A. Tripathy,

Advocate -versus-

Sandhyarani Mohapatra & (cid:0)«(cid:0)(cid:17) Opp. Parties another

CORAM:

(cid:0)+(cid:0)2(cid:0)1(cid:0)•(cid:0)%(cid:0)/(cid:0)M((cid:0)(cid:3)R. JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO

ORDER

07.04.2026 Order (Hybrid Mode )

No.

03. 1. Learned counsel for the Petitioner is heard at some length.

2. The petition was presented before this Court on 26.10.2022. Defects were pointed out by S.R. dated

10.11.2022. The defects were not removed. The matter was taken up by the Deputy Registrar

(Judicial), Lawzima on 21.11.2025. Three weeks (cid:0) •time was granted for removal of defects. Thereafter, the matter was listed before the Bench on 16.03.2026. Further seven days time was granted for removal of

defects.

After removal of defects the matter is listed after

Page1 of 9

about four years of filing for Fresh Admission.

3. The Petitioner-husband in the marriage is before this Court challenging the judgment dated 03.08.2022 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Nayagarh in Crl.M.P. No.284 of 2017. By the

said judgment the application filed by the wife in the marriage then aged about 23 years and the minor daughter born from the wedlock aged about two years, under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. (since repealed

and substituted by pari materia provision, Section

144 of BNSS, 2023) was allowed. Per month the wife had claimed Rs.6,000/- as maintenance for her and Rs.2,000/- for the minor child to prevent vagrancy

and destitution.

4. The learned Judge, Family Court, Nayagarh adjudicated the matter based upon the evidence rendered by the Petitioner-Opposite Party- wife as P.W.1, her father as P.W.2. The present Petitioner examined himself as OPW 1 and a co-villager as OPW

2.

The evidence on record regarding earning of the present Petitioner, is Rs.20,000/- per month and

agricultural income, the total income: Rs.3,00,000/-

per annum remain unrebutted.

However, the learned Judge, Family Court, Nayagarh directed Rs.3,000/- per month for the wife and Rs.1500/- for the child from the date of

Page2 of 9

application, i.e., 27.11.2017.

5. Based on instruction received, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that no amount has been paid by the Petitioner during the pendency of the petition before the learned Judge, Family Court or as per the judgment and order dated 03.08.2022. The

total amount due till 27.03.2026 for 99 months comes to Rs.4,45,500/-.

6. To resist the monthly maintenance it is submitted by learned counsel of the Petitioner that petitioner is a daily wager, though apparently no

such evidence has been adduced before the learned Judge, Family Court.

7. The scope and implication of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. has been elaborately dealt with by the

(cid:0)+(cid:0)R(cid:0)Q(cid:0)•(cid:0)E(cid:0)O(cid:0)H(cid:0)(cid:3) (cid:0)6(cid:0)X(cid:0)S(cid:0)U(cid:0)H (cid:0)Pin(cid:0) HR(cid:0)(cid:3)a(cid:0)&je(cid:0)Rns(cid:0)Xh (cid:0)Uv.(cid:0) WNeha: 2020 INSC 631: (2021) 2 SCC 324 . The relevant

paragraphs are reproduced herein.

(cid:0)·36. The amended S ection 125 reads as under:

(cid:0)·125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents .(cid:0)‡(1) If any person

having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain (cid:0)‡

(a) his wife, unable to maintain herself, or (b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child,

whether married or not, unable to maintain itself , or

(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has a ttained majority,

where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain

Page3 of 9

itself , or (d) his father or mother, unable to maintain

himself or herself, a Magistrate of the First Class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order

such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate as such Ma