Angshuman Chakraborty. V. Arpita Banerjee (Criminal Revision No. 1143 of 2015)
Under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the petitioner preferred the provisional application and challenged the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Durgapur, in Criminal Appeal No. 41 of 2014 on February 27, 2015, affirming the order dated September 25, 2014, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durgapur, in Misc. Case No. 69 of 2013, by which the petitioner husband was directed by learned Judges of the court to make payment of Rs. 5,000/- per month as interim maintenance in favour of the opposite party wife.
It appeared from the materials on record that under Section 23(1) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the Domestic Violence Act) an application was filed by the opposite party’s wife against the petitioner husband before the court of learned Magistrate praying for Rs. 15,000/- per month as interim maintenance on the ground that the opposite party wife was forced to live in her parent’s house and had no livelihood income for her, while the petitioner’s husband received around Rs. 80,000 per month as an engineer who left the IIT. Meanwhile, a written objection was filed by the petitioner husband against the application filed by the opposite party’s wife.
The petitioner was unemployed and had no jobs or income. But Mr. Chatterjee disputes this truth. therefore the court preferred to cut interim maintenance to some degree, so that, before the final maintenance sum is settled by the trial court is supposed to fix the sum of interim maintenance @ Rs 4,000/- a month instead of Rs. 5,000/- per month.
As such, the petitioner’s husband was directed to make payment per month of interim maintenance @ Rs. 4000/- in favour, with effect from the day of the order of the learned magistrate, to the opposite party wife. The complainant is demanded to pay for current maintenance every month by the 10th day of the following month.
The petitioner was also asked to make a payment, within October 15, 2015, for support for the opposite party wife, of maintenance lapses measured at the above amount. In Criminal Appeal Number 41, 2014, the decision of the designated Additional Chief Judiciary Judge, 2 Court of Durgapur of the appointment of 25 September 2014 has been amended to the above degree. Therefore, the criminal review is disposed of.