Dwijendralal Suklabaidya vs Sabita Rani Suklabaidya

Hitesh Kumar Sarma, J

[1] This is a Criminal Revision Petition filed under Sections 397/401 of the Cr.PC, challenging the legality, propriety and correctness of the order, dated 16.07.2008, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hailakandi in Misc. Case No. 55/2007 enhancing maintenance allowance to the opposite party for the 3rd time.

[2] I have heard Mr. PK Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the opposite party on call today.

[3] As after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court is not going to pass any adverse order against the opposite party, this revision petition is taken up for disposal even in the absence of the opposite party.

[4] It has been submitted by Mr. Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and also averred in the petition that in the year 1996, the opposite party and her children were granted maintenance allowance of different amount totalling Rs. 400 per month, which was enhanced to Rs. 500/- in the year 2000 and thereafter in the year 2003, it was enhanced to Rs. 600/- and finally, in the year 2008, the maintenance allowance has been raised to Rs. 1,000/- on applications made by the opposite party.

[5] I have perused the orders enhancing the maintenance allowance.

[6] However, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Roy has submitted that the circumstances have since been changed and the petitioner is bed ridden now and is unable to offer maintenance granted by the court. He is, in fact, looked after by his brother and also by the opposite party herself.

[7] Since the revision petitioner has raised an issue of inability to pay the maintenance allowance on the ground of ill health, this court is of the view that this fact, if proved, amounts to change of circumstances as provided in Section 127 of the Cr.PC.

[8] Therefore, this revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to approach the learned trial court with an appropriate application for modification of the order in accordance with the provisions of Section 127 of the Cr.PC on the basis of changed circumstances which he has raised before this court. However, no order is passed reducing the maintenance allowance at this stage, as agreed to by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

[9] In view of the above, this revision petition stands disposed of.

[10] Send down the LCR along with a copy of this judgment.