Dismissed

Nand Kishore Sah v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC5 Dec 2017Cr.Rev./1508/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the criminal revision against an order of the Family Court enhancing monthly maintenance. The court found the enhancement justified due to the petitioner's possession of landed properties and other assets, refusing to interfere with the lower court's finding.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; order enhancing maintenance from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 5,000/- per month stands.

Nand Kishore Sah Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Revision No. 1508 of 2015

¶2

Nand Kishore Sah … … Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Sobha Devi … … Opposite Parties --- CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --For the Petitioner : Mr. Purnendu Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party No. 1 : Mr. H. P. Singh, A.P.P. For the Opposite Party No. 2 : Mr. S. P. Roy, Advocate

¶3

8/05.12.2017 Heard Mr. Purnendu Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. P. Roy, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

¶4

The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 05.10.2015 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Godda in Misc. Petition Case No. 2 of 2012 by which an application preferred by the opposite party no. 2 under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. has been allowed and the monthly maintenance has been enhanced from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 5,000/- per month.

¶5

Submission has been advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is still ready and willing to keep the opposite party no. 2 with full dignity and honour. It has been stated that opposite party no. 2 has also been provided with a house by the petitioner and she is drawing rent from that house. He further submits that no reason has been assigned by the learned court below while enhancing the amount of maintenance since the financial condition of the petitioner has deteriorated after the initial order of maintenance was passed on 16.02.2001. He further submits that quantum of maintenance be reduced considering the financial status of the petitioner.

¶6

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has opposed the prayer.

¶7

It appears that the petitioner has filed an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. being Maintenance Case No. 52 of 1998 in which an amount of Rs. 500/- was allowed in favour of the opposite party no. 2. Subsequently, in the year 2012, on an application filed under Section 127 of Cr.P.C., the maintenance was enhanced from Rs. 500/- to Rs. 5,000/-

¶8

-2-

¶9

per month which is the order impugned in the present application. It appears from the perusal of the impugned order dated 05.10.2015 that the petitioner has got landed properties and has also 2 houses and 2 shops in Godda. It further appears that the petitioner in evidence has admitted that he has got 3 wives. The admission of the petitioner with respect to his properties led the learned court below to enhance the maintenance to Rs. 5,000/- per month. The amount of Rs. 5,000/- is a justifiable amount considering the present day price index as also considering the fact that the petitioner has got sufficient means to pay such amount.

¶10

There being no reason to interfere with the impugned order, I am not inclined to entertain this application, which is accordingly, dismissed.

¶11

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)

¶12

R. Shekhar Cp 3

Nand Kishore Sah v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nand Kishore Sah v. The State Of Jharkhand 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

Arjun Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Neyaz Ansari Vs Ashmina Khatoon and Ors.

Rajesh Ranjan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Gopal Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Raju Mukhi And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Lalit Kujur Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.