Decided on February 17,2021

Sarmistha Dewan Ghosh Appellant
Milanmoy Dewan Respondents


S.G.Chattopadhyay,J. - (1.) The petitioner ('the wife' hereunder) has challenged the order dated 07.02.2020 delivered in case No. Misc (Int.) 648 of 2019 by Judge, Family Court, Agartala refusing to grant interim maintenance allowance to her in a pending proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C hereunder).
(2.) Brief facts of the case are as under: The wife filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband claiming monthly maintenance allowance of a sum of Rs.1(one)Lakh. The wife stated in her application that her marriage with the respondent was registered under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 on 17.10.2003. While she married the respondent, she had a daughter from her past marriage who was 19 years old at the time of her marriage with the respondent. Her marriage with her past husband was dissolved by a decree of divorce granted by the District Judge, West Tripura on 17.01.2001. Similarly, the respondent husband also had a daughter from his first wife who died in 2001 and after the death of his first wife, respondent married the present petitioner. No child was born to them from their present marriage.
(3.) The wife has brought several allegations of cruelty against her husband. It is alleged by her that after marriage they lived peacefully for about 2 years. Thereafter the troubles began. According to the wife, after her marriage with the respondent, she kept her daughter with her parents for about 3 years. Thereafter, she brought her daughter back to her with the consent of her respondent husband. The respondent was then an assistant engineer in ONGC who was later elevated to the post of chief engineer in ONGC, in its Tripura Asset. In 2008 the husband was transferred to Mumbai for off-shore duty. During his off duty period for 14 days he used to visit his wife and children at Agartala and the wife never neglected in taking care of her husband and his daughter. Her husband was a Buddhist by religion and she was a Hindu. He always used to interfere with her religious practices and developed a habit of mocking her on this issue which hurt the petitioner. Their food habits were also different. The husband was fond of dry fish and pork whereas the wife did not like such food. She was not also allowed to cook or bring food of her choice. There was, therefore, no alternative for her but to starve or to bring food from her parents. Even adequate accommodation was not provided to her at her matrimonial home for living. It has been alleged by the wife that she was treated by her husband like a domestic helper and in many other ways her husband tortured her psychologically. She was also subjected to physical assault by her husband. Following an incident in September, 2016, the respondent slapped the wife in front of her daughter. When the agitated daughter raised her protest, she was also beaten by the husband. The wife was also economically abused by her respondent husband. Whenever she demanded money from her husband to meet her needs, he used to ask her to bring money from her NRI brother. The wife has pointed out to many other incidents of torture and atrocities mated out to her by her husband. Ultimately, on 26.07.2019 her husband had driven her out of his home after committing torture on her. Since then, she has been living with her parents. As stated by the wife, monthly salary of her husband is around 3 lakhs. In addition he gets monthly rent of an amount of Rs.22,000/-for renting one 3BHK flat in Rosedale apartment situated at Lichubagan, Agartala. She has, therefore, claimed Rs.1 Lakh per month for her maintenance by filing an application under Section 125, Cr.P.C.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.