Dismissed

Shekh Nurzan v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC10 Feb 2023CR. REV./269/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal revision where the petitioner failed to appear, the High Court examined records to ascertain if the wife was entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. Finding the divorce case dismissed and the need to save the wife from destitution, the Court directed recovery of arrears and dismissed the revision against the impugned order.

What did the court decide?

The learned Family Court is directed to recover arrears of Rs. 3000/- per month and amounts for the minor son within eight weeks.

Shekh Nurzan Vs State Of Bihar and Anr. — Maintenance and Alimony | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL REVISION No.269 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year-1111 Thana- District-

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Shekh Nurzan Son of Ali Akhtar, Resident of village - Garhwa, Police Station Majhauliya, District - West Champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Bihar and Anr

¶8

Raushan Ara, Daughter of Quamrul Hasan @ Khairati, Resident of village - Garhwa, Police Station Majhauliya, District - West Champaran, Presently Residing at Bathna, Police Station - Majhauliya, District - West Champaran

¶9

... ... Respondent/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar No.-7, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Sangeeta Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 10-02-2023 None appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

¶13

The present criminal revision is being filed against the order dated 05.01.2017 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bettiah, West Champaran in Maintenance Case No. 137 of 2006, whereby and whereunder the petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 3000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 and Rs. 1000/- to his minor son till attaining the age of his majority as maintenance amount with effect from the date of filing of the maintenance case i.e. on 23.10.2006.

¶14

None appeared on behalf of the petitioner on

¶15

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.269 of 2017(3) dt.10-02-2023 2/4

¶16

01.02.2023, when the matter was taken on board for the first time, after filing in year 2017 and thereafter, this matter was again taken on board today, where none appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

¶17

The court is having of two options, either to dismiss this case in default giving a space to petitioner to seek restoration of case and again to keep this litigation alive, where opposite party is struggling for her maintenance, the 2^nd option as available to this Court is to go through the records of the case and to take an appropriate view on the basis of materials available on the records and legal provisions as applicable to the given set of facts and circumstances.

¶18

The court, after considering both as discussed above choosed, the 2^nd option by taking note of ultimate object of law as to save the opposite party from the hand of destitution, as therefore perused the records of the case to take an appropriate view on the basis of materials available on the records and legal provisions as applicable to the given set of facts and circumstances, for just and equitable decision.

¶19

It appears from perusal of impugned order that opposite party no. 2 is a legally wedded wife of the petitioner, which is admitted by the petitioner during the course of trial, the

¶20

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.269 of 2017(3) dt.10-02-2023 3/4

¶21

only plea for non-maintenance was that opposite party was divorced by this petitioner, who solemnized their marriage, as per muslim rituals and in furtherance thereof, after divorce “Iddat and Den Mohar” are duly paid to the opposite party, remaining no liabilities.

¶22

It appears that petitioner solemnized his second marriage. It also appears from the impugned order that the separate divorce case was filed by the petitioner, which was dismissed on 05.01.2017, on the same very day, the impugned order was passed.

¶23

Considering in totality as above, and by taking note of the settled proposition of law and prime object, as laid down through section 125 of the Cr.P.C., as to save the opposite party from the hand of destitution, it cannot be refused merely on the ground that ‘Iddat and Den Mohar’ is paid. It further appears that the divorce case was already dismissed by the Court of law, the amount which is allowed as a maintenance to opposite party is also appearing very meager amount and as such in the circumstances, discussed above, this Court find no reason to interfere, thereof.

¶24

The learned Family Court, Bettiah is directed to take all appropriate steps within the frame of law to recover all

¶25

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.269 of 2017(3) dt.10-02-2023 4/4

¶26

the arrears amount in terms of impugned order from petitioner/revisionist, at the earliest and to to make it available

¶27

to the opposite party within eight weeks of this order.

¶28

Accordingly, the present criminal revision petition stands dismissed at admission stage, itself.

¶29

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶30

Archana/-

¶31

U T

Shekh Nurzan v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shekh Nurzan v. State Of Bihar 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

Shourya @ Shaurya Kumar @ Nihal Kumar @ Nihal Vs The State of Bihar

Arvind Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Priyanka Kumari @ Priyanka Sharma Vs Child Welfare Committee, Patna

Birendra Jha Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Pankaj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Mustaque Alam @ Mustaque @ Mustaque Alam Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.