Anowar Hussain v. Namita Das

ORDER

25.06.2024 Heard Mr R Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner, who has filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, with prayer for quashing the entire proceeding of FC (Crl.) No. 844/2023, pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta.

¶2It is submitted that the impugned order dated 02.05.2024, was passed without Page No.# 2/4 considering the petitioner's side of the story.

¶3It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent has fraudulently brought up a case under Section 125 CrPC against the petitioner, misrepresenting herself to be the petitioner's legally married wife. In reality, the respondent is not the petitioner's legally married wife. The respondent has given false name and address in the petition under Section 125 CrPC. The Annexure-1 of the petition clearly reveals that the name and address of the respondent is not similar to the name and address given in the cause title of this petition. However, the case was registered and the first order was passed on 08.12.2023, issuing notice to the petitioner and the date was fixed on

17.02.2024. The order dated 17.02.2024, clearly reflects that the notices were served on the petitioner and the next date was fixed on 02.04.2024. On 02.04.2024, the petitioner, prayed for time to file his written statement and without allowing an opportunity to the petitioner to file his written statement, the impugned order dated 02.05.2024 was passed ex parte. The order clearly reflects that the petitioner was busy on election duty during the parliamentary elections and he was not accorded sufficient time to present his case. The petitioner also did not have the opportunity to file his Statement of Assets and Liabilities and the respondent fraudulently did not file her own Statement of Assets and Liabilities, thus, violating the guidelines of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Rajnesh –Vs-Neha; reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324.

¶4In addition to the above discrepancies, the Annexure-6 of the petition, clearly Page No.# 3/4 reveals that the respondent's daughter is not the petitioner's daughter. Her father's name is mentioned in the birth certificate, which is annexed as Annexure-6 of the petition. The Gaoburah's certificate clearly reveals that the respondent's husband is not the petitioner, but another person, who is a resident of Village-Majrabari, P.O.-Simla, P.S.-Simla, District-Baksa (BTR). The Gaonburah's certificate is marked as Annexure-7 of the petition.

¶5It is submitted that in a subterfuged manner, the respondent has concealed her identity and has fraudulently procured the order of maintenance and the order is thus liable to be set aside.

¶6The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed that as the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, has directed the petitioner to pay maintenance @ Rs. 10,000/- per month, without deciding the quantum of interim maintenance based on the Statements of Assets and Liabilities of the petitioner, the impugned order is thus bad in law and is liable to be set aside.

¶7I have considered the submissions at the Bar with circumspection.

¶8I have scrutinized the documents submitted to buttress the respondent's claim.

¶9I have also considered the submission that the petitioner is willing to contest the proceeding and present his case before the learned Family Court. The petitioner has also prayed for an opportunity to submit his Statements of Assets and Liabilities, along with his written statement. Pragmatic view is taken. Instead of quashing the entire Page No.# 4/4 proceeding, I deem it proper to accord an opportunity to the petitioner to present his case before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta.

¶10Considering all aspects and in view of my foregoing discussions, the impugned order dated 02.05.2024, is hereby set aside and the petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, within 2 (two) weeks and present his case.

¶11In terms of the above observations, this criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant

Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010103422024 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./609/2024 ANOWAR HUSSAIN S/O LATE JANGSHER ALI, VILL- KAYAKUCHI PAM, P.S.-BARPETA, DIST- BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS NAMITA DAS W/O ARABINDA DAS, D/O LATE SUREN DAS, VILL- MAJRABARI, P.O. AND P.S.-SIMLA, DIST- BAKSA (BTAD), ASSAM, PIN-781330 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R ALI Advocate for the Respondent : BEFORE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUSMITA PHUKAN KHAUND