Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Smt. Sukla Karmakar vs Unknown on 8 November, 2019
Author: Tirthankar Ghosh
Bench: Tirthankar Ghosh
1 Court No. C.R.R. 2669 of 2006 34 Sl 43 Ssi 8.11.19
In the matter of :- Smt. Sukla Karmakar None appears for the petitioner.
No accommodation is sought for.
The revisional application has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 6.8.2006 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 1st Court, Raiganj in Criminal Revision.8 of 2005. By the said judgment, the revisional court was pleased to affirm the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Raiganj in TR Case No. 470 of 2003.
I find that the learned Magistrate on a bare narration of the husband that he is willing to take back his wife was pleased to refuse to maintenance on the ground that the wife was staying at her father's house without any justified cause.
The learned Magistrate failed to appreciate that earlier, the wife was assaulted at her matrimonial home and after being assaulted, she returned back to her matrimonial home.
I do not find the reason so assigned by the learned Magistrate is adhering to the basic principles for which Chapter 9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was enacted. Mere statement without any justifiable cause, is of no evidentiary value and the learned Magistrate should have taken into consideration the torture inflicted upon the victim/wife for refusing to stay with the husband. The learned revisional court also did not apply its mind and affirmed the order passed by the learned Magistrate.
In view of the specific contention of the wife that she was subjected to torture and driven out of her matrimonial home. I do not think that the order so passed by the learned Court and affirmed by the learned revisional court is sustainable.
Accordingly, the order dated 6.8.2006 passed in Criminal Revision No. 8 of 2005 and the judgment and order dated 16.10.2004 passed in T.R. 470 of 2003 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd 2 Court, Raiganj, is hereby set aside.
The learned Magistrate is directed to issue notice upon the petitioner and re-appreciate whole of the evidence and arrive at a fresh conclusion as prayed by the wife/petitioner.
In view of the long pendency of this case before this Court and the wife/petitioner being without any remedy for such a long time, I direct the learned Magistrate would take sincere efforts so that the wife/petitioner would be provided and aided with immediate expectations of a litigant before the court of law.
Accordingly, CRR 2669 of 2006 is allowed.
Department is directed to communicate this order to the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Raiganj immediately.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order may be supplied to the parties expeditiously, if applied for.
(Tirthankar Ghosh, J.)