Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
On 03.03.2018, Learned Magistrate disposed of the said application under
Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and directed the present petitioner
to make payment of Rs.84,650/- to the petitioner by four equal instalments
within four months from the date of the order.
Impugned order has been assailed by the Learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioner on various grounds. According to his contention the Learned
Magistrate has committed error both in law and in facts. At the time of passing
the impugned order, Learned Magistrate overlooked the facts that the present
petitioner is a married person having five daughters and his marriage was
solemnized in the year 1967 with one Annapurna Giri. In the year 1981, the
petitioner had to undergo vasectomy operation at Block Primary Health Centre of
Midnapur District. After the said vasectomy operation, the petitioner got his
seamen test and said test indicated the operation was successful.
Learned Advocate has specifically contended that Learned Magistrate ought
to have considered that after successful vasectomy operation in the year 1981,
the question of becoming father of the daughter of the petitioner in the year
1982, does not arise at all. The claim of the present opposite party that the
petitioner is the father of her daughter is totally false and baseless.
In support of his contention, Learned Counsel for the petitioner, has placed
his reliance on Annexure 'A' and 'B' at pages 16 and 17 respectively and also at
page 18 of his application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
From the materials placed on record, it appears that the present petitioner
has totally denied the factum of his marriage with the opposite party and his
access with the opposite party. Present petitioner has laid emphasis on the
vasectomy operation at Bagda Block Primary Health Centre, Medinipur, in the
year 1981 and trying to impress upon the Court that after successful vasectomy
operation in the year 1981, the question of his becoming father in the year 1982
does not arise at all.