Sampa Saha (Nee Sarkar) vs Amaresh Saha

Debi Prasad Sengupta, J.—In spite of notice, nobody appears on behalf of the opposite party/husband.

In the present application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 26.4.2004 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Siliguri in M.R. Case No. 28 of 2004 thereby rejecting the prayer for ad interim maintenance filed by the petitioner in a proceeding u/s 125, Cr. PC.

It appears that the petitioner filed an application u/s 125, Cr. PC before the learned Magistrate and in connection with the said proceeding u/s 125, Cr. PC an application was also filed praying for interim maintenance for herself. From the impugned order, it appears that the learned Magistrate rejected such prayer for interim maintenance without assigning any reason and without recording any satisfaction as to why such interim maintenance should be refused.

In my considered view, the said order suffers from serious illegality and the same should be set aside. Accordingly, I allow the present application and set aside the impugned order dated 26.4.2004 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court, Siliguri and the matter is sent back to the learned Magistrate, who will take up the matter immediately and consider the prayer for interim maintenance as prayed for by the petitioner/wife afresh. The learned Magistrate after hearing the parties, will pass an appropriate reasoned order within a period of four weeks from the date of communication of this order.

Let urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the learned Advocate of the petitioner at an early date.