Prasanta Kumar Sahu Vs Tunee Sahu — Domestic Violence | Orissa HC (2026)

Prasanta Kumar Sahu Vs Tunee Sahu — Domestic Violence | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Monthly maintenance consolidated at Rs.15,000/- payable on the 10th of each succeeding month; arrears of Rs.5,09,290/- to be recovered through a Rs.1,09,290/- deposit by end of May, 2026 and the balance Rs.4,00,000/- in 36 monthly instalments commencing 15.06.2026 (dates of subsequent instalments to be fixed by the learned Court in seisin), all deposited into the Opposite Party's State Bank of India, Utkela Branch account and all in addition to the running Rs.15,000/- monthly maintenance; on default, action in accordance with law and possible DDO salary deduction; pending I.As. disposed of along with the CRLREV.

Issue for consideration

Whether the monetary relief awarded by the learned Courts below (Rs.8,000/- per month for daily expenses, Rs.4,000/- per month for house rent and Rs.8,000/- per month for maintenance of the minor son) is excessive and merits reduction. +1 more

Court's answer

On going through the rival submissions with reference to the evidence and materials on record, this Court held that directing the Petitioner to pay a consolidated sum of Rs.15,000/- per month towards maintenance (in lieu of the itemised reliefs directed by the Trial Court and affirmed on appeal) would subserve the ends of justice.

Ratio / Principle

From the calculation sheet submitted by the Petitioner's counsel and taken on record (the amount indicated therein not disputed by the Opposite Party), the arrear maintenance was fixed at Rs.5,09,290/-.

Key takeaways

In the event of any default in the directed payments, it shall be open for the Opposite Party to initiate action in accordance with law, and it shall also be open to the learned Court in seisin to consider directing the Petitioner's Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO) to effect necessary deduction from the Petitioner's salary and ensure deposit of the amounts into the Opposite Party's account as per the timeline directed.ratio¶44

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ORISSA HIGH COURT (V. Narasingh, Judge) - CRLREV No.655 of 2025 - Prasanta Kumar Sahu v. Tunee Sahu - Order dated 16.03.2026 - Domestic-violence maintenance revision disposed with quantum consolidated and arrears staggered. The Revision assailed the judgment dated 19.08.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.21 of 2024 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('D.V. Act'), which had affirmed the S.D.J.M., Bhawanipatna's order dated 01.05.2024 in C.M.C. No.35 of 2021 directing monthly payments of Rs.8,000/- (monetary relief for daily expenses), Rs.4,000/- (house rent) and Rs.8,000/- (maintenance of minor son Arnab), payable by the 5th of each succeeding English calender month. Petitioner's counsel argued the award was ex-facie excessive, resting primarily on extra emoluments paid during his inherently temporary CRPF posting in Assam, and that the educational-expense component for the son studying in KV, Bhawanipatna was exorbitant; the Opposite Party's counsel defended the award, noting the son is aged about 12 years. Weighing the rival submissions against the evidence on record, the Court found a consolidated Rs.15,000/- per month sufficient to subserve the ends of justice, payable on the 10th of each succeeding month. From the Petitioner's calculation sheet (taken on record and undisputed by the Opposite Party), arrears stood at Rs.5,09,290/-, to be met by Rs.1,09,290/- deposited by end of May, 2026 and the balance Rs.4,00,000/- in 36 monthly instalments from 15.06.2026 (subsequent dates to be fixed by the Court in seisin), each layer in addition to the running Rs.15,000/-, all credited to the Opposite Party's State Bank of India, Utkela Branch account furnished by memo. On default, the Opposite Party may act in accordance with law and the Court in seisin may direct the Petitioner's DDO to deduct amounts from salary. CRLREV and pending I.As. stand disposed of.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

CRLREV No.655 of 2025

Prasanta Kumar Sahu

Petitioner

Mr. U.C. Mishra, Advocate

-versus-

Tunee Sahu

…. Opposite Party

Ms. S. Panigrahi, Advocate

CORAM: JUSTICE V. NARASINGH ORDER

16.03.2026

Order No.

04 .

Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner and learned counsel for the Opposite Party.

Assailing the judgment dated 19.08.2025 in Criminal Appeal No.21 of 2024 passed by the learned District & Sessions Judge, Kalahandi, Bhawanipatna in exercise of his power under Section 29 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as „the D.V. Act‟) thereby affirming the order passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhawanipatna dated 01.05.2024 in C.M.C. No.35 of 2021 of the learned Trial Court directing the Petitioner to pay the amounts on the following grounds, this Criminal Revision has been preferred:-

“(i) Rs.8,000/per month to the respondent/petitioner as monetary reliefs for daily expenses;

Page 1 of 5

(ii) Rs.4,000/- per month towards house rent; and

(iii) Rs.8,000/- per month for maintenance of minor son Arnab;

and all payable by the 5^th of each succeeding English calender month.”

Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the amount as awarded is ex-facie excessive and the learned Courts below failed to appreciate that the Petitioner who is serving as a Constable in CRPF because of his posting in Assam was paid extra emoluments, which primarily form the basis of awarding the compensation and the learned Courts below also failed to take into account that since the son of the Petitioner is studying in KV, Bhawanipatna the amount claimed towards his educational expenses is also exorbitant.

It is submitted that so far as the emoluments of the Petitioner while he is being posted in Assam cannot be made the basis of assessment for the reasons that the pay package receivable during such posting in Assam is inherently temporary.

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party, Ms. Panigrahi submits that admittedly the son of the Petitioner and the Opposite Party is aged about 12 years and hence it cannot be said the amount awarded towards his educational expenses and his

Page 2 of 5

day-to-day expenses is on the higher side. Hence, the matter does not merit any interference.

On going through the rival submissions, with reference to the evidence and the materials on record, this Court is of the considered view that directing the Petitioner to pay a consolidated sum of Rs.15,000/- towards monthly maintenance would subserve the ends of justice.

In the light of such finding of this Court, learned counsel for the Petitioner was called upon to submit a calculation sheet keeping in view the amount which is claimed to have been paid till date in terms of the earlier orders passed by the learned Trial Court, Appellate Court as well as this Court.

The calculation sheet filed by way of memo is taken on record and copy thereof has been served on the learned counsel for the Opposite Party who does not dispute the amount so indicated in the calculations.

From such calculation sheet, it is seen that the arrear maintenance comes to Rs.5,09,290/-. 9. On consideration of the rival submissions, on the touchstone of equity inter se, it is directed that the Petitioner shall pay the sum of Rs.15,000/- per month towards maintenance and the same shall be paid on 10^th of each succeeding month, the maintenance becoming due i.e. for example for the

Page 3 of 5

month of March, 2026, the amount shall fall due on 10^th of April, 2026 so on and so forth.

It is further directed that the Petitioner shall deposit a sum of Rs.1,09,290/- by end of May, 2026 towards arrears.

It is needless to state here that such deposit shall be in addition to the amount of Rs.15,000/which shall fall due on 10^th of May, 2026.

The balance amount of Rs.4,00,000/- towards monthly maintenance shall be payable by way of 36 monthly instalments. The first of such instalment shall fall due from 15^th of June, 2026. The learned Court in seisin shall fix the date of subsequent instalments. Such deposit shall be in addition to the amount of Rs.15,000/- as directed above.

The Petitioner shall deposit the amount as aforesaid in the account of the Opposite Party.

The details of address and the bank account of the Opposite Party as furnished by way of memo is taken on record.

The same runs thus:-

Bank A/C Holder Name:- Tunee Sahu Address- C/o- Somnath Sahu

Chancher,

Utkela -766011, Kalahandi A/C No.- 00000020058187561 IFSC Code- SBIN0006089

Page 4 of 5

MICR Code- 766002203

Bank Name- State Bank of India, Utkela Branch, Kalahandi.

In the event of any default in payment as aforesaid, it shall be open for the Opposite Party to initiate action in accordance with law. And, it shall also be open to the learned Court in seisin to consider to direct the (Drawing and Disbursing Officer) DDO of the Petitioner to effect necessary deduction from the salary of the Petitioner and ensure deposit of the amount(s) as directed in the aforementioned account of the Opposite Party, as per the time line as above. 14. Accordingly, the CRLREV stands disposed of. In view of disposal of CRLREV, pending I.As., if any, also stand disposed of.

(V. Narasingh) Judge

Ayesha

Signature Not Verified

Digitally Signed Signed by: AYESHA ROUT Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, C utta ck Date: 18-Mar-2026 19:58:26

Page 5 of 5