R.K.BAG, J. - (1.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has filed two separate affidavits -of - service in connection with CRR No. 648 of 2014 and two more affidavits -of - service in connection with CRR No. 649 of 2014 which are kept with the record.
(2.) THE petitioner has preferred criminal revision being CRR No. 648 of 2014 against order dated 26th November, 2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Alipore in Misc. Case No. 190 of 2009, by which learned Magistrate allowed the application of the opposite party under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The petitioner has also preferred criminal revision being CRR No. 649 of 2014 against the opposite party praying for expeditious disposal of proceeding being Misc. Case No. 190 of 2009, pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Alipore. Both the criminal revisions are taken up for hearing analogously with the consent of the learned counsels appearing in these cases. The background of filing the criminal revisions is that the petitioner was married to the opposite party on 14th October, 1994, according to Hindu rites and religion. Two children were born from this wedlock. The marriage between the petitioner and the opposite party was dissolved by mutual consent on 16th May, 2007 in Mat Suit No. 233 of 2006 before the Family Court at Calcutta. It appears from record that the opposite party took up the responsibility of maintaining the children on the basis of mutual consent between the petitioner and the opposite party as recorded in the order passed in Mat Suit No. 233 of 2006. However, the opposite party was not in a position to maintain the children and, as such, the opposite party handed over the custody of the children in favour of the petitioner in the month of August, 2008 and the children started living with the petitioner. The petitioner -mother had to start a proceeding under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for claiming maintenance from the opposite party. The interim maintenance, granted by learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court in Misc. Case No. 190 of 2009 on 12th August, 2009, was challenged before the High Court by filing CRR No. 3726 of 2009 and the said criminal revision was disposed of on 29th April, 2011 by giving direction to the opposite party to make payment of interim maintenance at the rate of Rs. 15,000/ - for each child during the pendency of the maintenance proceeding before the Court of learned Magistrate.
(3.) IT appears from record that learned Magistrate started recording the evidence of the petitioner as P.W. 1 in Misc. Case No. 190 of 2009 on 13th December, 2010 and the examination -in -chief of P.W. 1 continued on 5th February, 2011 and 29th April, 2011. It further appears from record that the cross -examination of P.W. 1 by the opposite party was started before the Court of learned Magistrate on 23rd September, 2011 and continued on 5th November, 2011, 4th April, 2012 and completed on 4th February, 2013. It appears from record that learned Magistrate closed the evidence on behalf of the petitioner and fixed the date for adducing evidence by the opposite party on 8th May, 2013, 12th July, 2013 and 1st August, 2013, but no evidence was adduced by the opposite party on those dates. The opposite party filed an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 24th September, 2013 praying for recalling of P.W. 1 i.e. the petitioner for further cross -examination in order to seek clarification of the document exhibited by the petitioner for the just decision of the case. By passing the impugned order on 26th November, 2013, which is challenged in CRR No. 648 of 2014, learned Magistrate allowed the application for further cross -examination of P.W. 1.;