Allowed

Safiur Rahman v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Gauhati HC8 Apr 2019Crl.Pet./322/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner appealed against maintenance orders granting Rs. 4,000/month to wife and son. Court upheld the lower court's order for the wife and son, directing maintenance until a Section 127 CrPC application by the petitioner is disposed of to assess changed circumstances. Petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to pay maintenance of Rs. 4,000/month to wife and son till Section 127 CrPC application is disposed of.

Safiur Rahman Vs the State of Assam and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/2

¶2

GAHC010001742017

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT

¶4

(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : Crl.Pet. 322/2018

¶6

1:SAFIUR RAHMAN

¶7

S/O- LATE ABUL KHAN, VILL- ITARBHITA, P.O- HOWLY, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN- 781301

¶8

VERSUS

¶9

1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM

¶10

7:SAHIDA BEGUM W/O- SAFIUR RAHMAN D/O- ABDUL SAMAD VILL AND P.O- GELLAPARA (SORBHOG) P.S- SORBHOG DIST- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 78130

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR S ALI Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM

¶12

BEFORE

¶13

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HITESH KUMAR SARMA

¶14

ORDER

¶15

Date : 08-04-2019

¶16

Heard Mr. S. Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. K. Patgiri, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2.

¶17

As agreed to by the learned counsel for both the parties, this court proposes to dispose of this petition at this order stage itself.

¶18

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that an amount of Rs. 4,000/- at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- each to the wife and the son of the petitioner has been

¶19

Page No.# 2/2

¶20

granted by the learned court below.

¶21

It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that so far the wife is concerned the petitioner is agreeable to pay Rs. 2,000/- per month. So far the son is concerned, according to the petitioner; he has attained majority, and therefore, not entitled to the maintenance allowance under Section 125 Cr.PC. According to him, he has attained majority during continuation of this proceeding.

¶22

That being so, in the considered view of this court, the petitioner has to pay the maintenance allowance granted by the learned court below, to the respondent and the son at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- per month, in total, till a decision on an application under Section 127 Cr.PC, to be filed by the petitioner, is disposed of by the learned court below.

¶23

So far the change of circumstances is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner would file an application under Section 127 Cr.PC. So keeping view of this fact , it is directed that the learned court below shall dispose of the 127 Cr.PC petition, if filed, as expeditiously as possible so as to decide whether there is change of circumstances to modify the order granting maintenance allowance. With the above observations and direction, this petition stands disposed of.

¶24

JUDGE

¶25

Comparing Assistant

Safiur Rahman v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Safiur Rahman v. the State of Assam and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mamtaz Ali and Anr. Vs the State of Assam

Namit Mohan Barman and 2 Ors. Vs the State of Assam

Lokojit Das Vs the State of Assam

Gajen Kalita and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Saynul Haque Choudhury @ Md. Sainul Haque Vs the State of Assam and Anr.

Mrs. Manashi Bordoloi Vs Magnum Enterprise