Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Orissa High Court

Bharati Sahoo vs Janmejay Rout @ Tulu .... Opp. Party on 7 December, 2023

Author: K.R. Mohapatra

Bench: K.R. Mohapatra

Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY
Reason: Authentication
Location: HIGH COURT ORISSA CUTTACK
Date: 08-Dec-2023 19:16:16



                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
                                                   RPFAM NO.66 OF 2023

                                Bharati Sahoo                                 ....        Petitioner
                                                                    Mr. Partha Sarathi Das, Advocate
                                                            -versus-
                                Janmejay Rout @ Tulu                          ....       Opp. Party


                                        CORAM:
                                        JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
                                                        ORDER

           Order No.                                   07.12.2023
               1.          1.         This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

2. Petitioner in this RPFAM seeks to assail the order dated 16th December, 2022 (Annexure-1) passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Keonjhar in Crl. P. No.113 of 2018, whereby an application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C. by the Petitioner has been dismissed.

3. It is submitted by Mr. Das, learned counsel that the Petitioner has married to the Opposite Party on 13th May, 2018 observing the formalities and as per customs in Lord Sidheswar Temple premises, Thakurpada, Harichandanpur in presence of their friends and relatives. It is also submitted that due to impotency of the Opposite Party, their marriage could not be consummated for which there was dissention between the parties. The Opposite Party also tortured the Petitioner for which she left the matrimonial house. The Petitioner does not have any independent source of income. As such, Crl.P. No.113 of 2018 was filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

Digitally Signed // 2 // Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 08-Dec-2023 19:16:16 3.1 The Opposite Party, on the other hand, seriously disputed the allegation of marriage with the Petitioner. It is submitted that the Petitioner had married to one Dipti Ranjan Nayak. The Petitioner has suppressed the said fact. There is also no document to the effect that the marriage between the Petitioner with said Dipti Ranjan Nayak was dissolved by a decree of divorce. Thus, the allegation of marriage with the Petitioner is not sustainable. As such, the Petitioner is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Learned Judge, Family Court disbelieving the plea of the Petitioner and relying upon the statements of the witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party held that the Petitioner is not the married wife of the Opposite Party. Hence, she is not entitled to any relief under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

3.2 Learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the witnesses on behalf of the Petitioner categorically stated that there was solemnization of marriage between the parties as per the caste and customs in the temple premises and the Petitioner has also described the incident vividly in her evidence. Learned Judge, Family Court disbelieved the same, giving undue weightage to the evidence of the witnesses examined on behalf of the Opposite Party. In that view of the matter, he prays for setting aside the impugned order and to remit the matter to learned Judge, Family Court, Keonjhar for fresh adjudication of the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

4. Upon hearing learned counsel for the Petitioner and on perusal of record, it appears that OPWs 2 to 7 have categorically stated that the Petitioner had married to one Dipti Ranjan Nayak, Page 2 of 3 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed // 3 // Signed by: SASANKA SEKHAR SATAPATHY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT ORISSA CUTTACK Date: 08-Dec-2023 19:16:16 son of Satrughna Nayak of Bolonuagaon, Sailong, Ghasipura in the district of Keonjhar. The father of said Dipti Ranjan Nayak, namely, Satrughna Nayak has been examined as OPW-3, who has also admitted the marriage between the Petitioner and Dipti Ranjan Nayak. The Opposite Party also exhibited an agreement marked as Ext. 'A', which disclosed that the Petitioner had earlier married to one Dipti Ranjan Nayak.

5. On assessment of evidence from both sides, learned Judge, Family Court, came to the conclusion that the Petitioner is not the legally married wife of the Opposite Party. The finding of learned Judge, Family Court is based on assessment of evidence available on record. Thus, this Court is not competent to reappreciate the same while exercising power under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, which is the nature of a revision under Cr.P.C. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned herein, which is based on assessment of materials on record.

6. Accordingly, the RPFAM is disposed of with an observation that the Petitioner may work out her remedy in accordance with law.

Issue urgent certified copy of the order on proper application.

(K.R. Mohapatra) Judge s.s.satpathy Page 3 of 3