Remanded

Smt Malti Devi v. State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Jharkhand HC14 Jun 2019Cr.Rev./95/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal revision, the High Court set aside an order denying a wife maintenance on grounds of adultery. The Court held the trial court crossed its jurisdiction by finding adultery without examining petitioned witnesses. The matter is remitted for de novo trial with opportunity to both parties.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside wife's maintenance application set aside; matter remitted to Family Court to decide case de novo within four months.

Smt Malti Devi Vs State of Jharkhand and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. Revision No.95 of 2013

¶3

Smt. Malti Devi Ver	….. Petitioner(s) sus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Satish Kumar Kashayap	….. Opposite Party(s) -----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.	JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN -----
For the Petitioner(s)	: Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate Mrs. Swati Shalini, Advocate
For the State	: A.P.P
For the O.P. No.2	: Mr. Praveen Kumar, Advocate -----

¶4

10/Dated: 14/06/2019

¶5

The instant application has been preferred by the petitioner-wife for setting aside the order dated 20^th December, 2012, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur in Miscellaneous Case No.157/2006, whereby the learned trial court has dismissed the application of the wife on the ground of adultery.

¶6

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial court has erred in deciding the issue of adultery only on the basis of certificate which has been exhibited as Exhibit 'C' given by the Principal of Madho Singh Balika Vidyalaya, South Park, Bistupur. She further submits that the petitioner is on the verge of starvation and as such this petition may be allowed and the trial court be directed to reconsider the case and fix the maintenance.

¶7

Per contra the counsel for the O.P. No.2 fully supported the impugned order and submitted that the petitioner is living with one Ravi Shankar Sharma and as such the learned trial court has rightly rejected her application.

¶8

Heard the learned counsels for the parties.

¶9

After perusal of records, it appears that the learned trial court has held that the applicant Malti Devi has illicit relation with one Ravi Shankar Sharma and she is living in adultery, and as such she is not entitled to receive any maintenance.

¶10

From perusal of the documents it appears that Exhibit 'C', is a certificate issued by the Principal, Madho Singh Balika Vidyalaya, South Park, Bistupur, which transpires that Priya Kumari who is the daughter of the applicant, is the daughter of Ravi Shankar Sharma. She is studying in the school at Class-V and according to the school register her date of birth is 14.03.1998.

¶11

The Learned trial court on the basis of Exhibit 'C' and

¶12

Exhibit 'B', which is the report prepared by one Deo Nandan Sharma, who is President of Akhil Bhartiya Nai Sangh, District- Seraikella Kharsawan, which transpires that the wife does not want to live with her husband, rejected the application of the petitioner.

¶13

At this stage, it is pertinent to mention here that neither Deo Nandan Sharma, who has prepared report dated 25.12.2009 (Exhibit-B), has been examined on oath nor the auther of the school register or the Principal of Madho Singh Balika Vidyalaya who prepared the certificate (Exhibit-C) has been examined so as to test the veracity of the certificates and the school register. It is not a case of the opposite party-husband that the petitioner is not her wife. The only defence of the opposite party no.2-husband is that the petitioner is living in adultery with one Ravi Shankar Sharma, as such, she is not entitled for maintenance. Interestingly, the learned trial court without examining the said Ravi Shankar Sharma, held him in adulterous relation with the petitioner. In my considered opinion the learned trial court has crossed its jurisdiction in deciding the issue of adultery in a summary proceeding without examining the necessary witnesses. The learned trial court has failed to appreciate that the opposite party no.2husband has not even filed any case of adultery against Ravi Shankar Sharma.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice it is desirable that the matter be remitted to the learned court below to decide the issue of maintenance after examining necessary witnesses as aforesaid. As a result, this application is allowed and the order dated 20^th December, 2012, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jamshedpur, is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur to decide the case de novo after giving opportunity to both the parties. It is made clear that the entire exercise should be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. The petitioner is at liberty to raise her ground of interim maintenance before the learned court below, who shall decide the same on its own merit.

¶15

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

¶16

Pramanik/

Smt Malti Devi v. State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Malti Devi v. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vijay Vishwakarma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rohit Nayak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Takla Singh Alias Dheeraj Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Praveen Kumar Roy Alias Pravin Kumar Roy Vs State of Jharkhand

Jata Shankar Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Mahesh Prasad Srivastawa Vs State of Jharkhand