DIPAK SAHA RAY,J. - (1.) THE present case arises out of an application under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It is directed against the Order dated 18.12.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kalyani, Nadia in Misc. Case No. 81 of 2007 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(2.) THE relevant facts of the present case are, in a nutshell, as follows: The petitioner herein/wife initiated a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against her husband/Opposite Party herein for maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- p.m. for herself. The said case was registered as Misc. Case No. 81 of 2007. In the said Misc. Case, the petitioner alleged inter alia that she was the legally married wife of the opposite party and in their wedlock two children were born. In the said application for maintenance, it was stated that her husband was a Military Personnel and used to stay at his place of posting and for the said reason she used to reside at her matrimonial home. During her such stay at her matrimonial home, her brother-in-law and sister-in-law used to inflict torture on her both mentally and physically. Whenever she informed the said matter to her husband, her husband without making any attempt to solve the matter, rebuked her for making such complaint. In the month of July, 2006, her husband/opposite party after keeping his son at his house brought the petitioner and her daughter to her place of posting i.e., at Nasik and after superannuation on 1.2.2007, the husband/opposite party came to his residence on 13.2.2007. On that very day, the husband/opposite party and his brother and sister-in-law after assaulting the petitioner physically, drove the petitioner out from her matrimonial home. It was also alleged that the husband/opposite party was getting Rs. 4,000/-/Rs. 5,000/- p.m. as pension and he also used to receive interest for Rs. 8lakh/ 9 lakh which he received as retirement benefits. In addition to that, the husband/opposite party had some income from his landed property. But the husband/opposite party inspite of his sufficient income neglected and/or refused to maintain the petitioner who had no independent source of income and was unable to maintain herself.
(3.) AS against this, the husband/opposite party contested the said Misc. Case by filing written objection. The opposite party in his written objection denied the material allegation made by the petitioner/wife. It was the specific case of the husband that the petitioner/wife used to live in adultery when he (the opposite party) stayed at his place of posting and ultimately, on 22.5.2005, the petitioner after leaving her son and daughter, left her matrimonial home with her paramour namely Tushar Ghosh and started living with him (Tushar Ghosh) as husband and wife. It was also the case of the husband/opposite party that he also informed the said matter to the Police by lodging General Diary with Naihati P.S. Accordingly, dismissal of the application for maintenance had been so prayed for. After taking into consideration all the materials on record, the learned trial court passed an order on 18.12.2010 rejecting the application for maintenance filed by the petitioner/wife under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order the petitioner/wife has preferred this instant revisional application.;