CRR/1795/2024 of ABULKALAM SK Vs CHANDMON NAHAR BIBI AND ANOTHER on 10 September 2026

1. When the matter is called on, none appears to represent the petitioner. Despite proper direction, he did not appear even on the last occasion, and this matter has been continuously running in the list. Considering the continuous absence of the petitioner, this Court takes up the matter for disposal on the basis of the materials available on record.

2. It appears from the revisional application that the petitioner, Abulkalam Sk., has prayed for quashing of the order dated 22nd March, 2022 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lalbagh, Murshidabad, in connection with M.R. Case No. 244 of 2019 filed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the ground that the impugned order was erroneously passed ex parte without considering the material facts, law, and circumstances of the case. It is contended that the opposite party initiated the proceeding against the petitioner for unlawful gain by suppressing material facts on record.

3. I have perused the impugned order, from which it appears that the opposite party, Ayesha Khatun Bibi, claimed maintenance for herself as well as for her minor child, but subsequently withdrew her prayer for herself and pressed the proceeding only for the maintenance of her minor child before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 2nd Court, Lalbagh, Murshidabad. She stated that she was married to the petitioner according to Muslim Shariat law and they lived as husband and wife, out of which wedlock Tohidul Islam was born, but she was driven out of his house for non-fulfillment of dowry demands and has since been residing separately with her child. It was further stated that the petitioner is a supplier of masons and labourers earning INR 60,000 per month, whereas the opposite party has no independent source of income, and she had prayed for maintenance of INR 10,000 per month for the child.

4. The learned trial Court considered the entire facts, evidence, and relevant law pertinent to the issue and allowed the application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, directing the petitioner to make payment of INR 1,000 per month towards the maintenance of the minor child.

5. Upon perusal of the same, I do not find any irregularity or impropriety in the order impugned. At this stage, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the order impugned.

6. Accordingly, the instant revisional application is dismissed on merits based on the record.

7. The learned trial court is at liberty to proceed with the trial or proceedings in the case pending before him, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.

8. There will be no order as to costs.

9. The interim order, if any, stands vacated.

10. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon compliance with requisite formalities.

(Uday Kumar, J.)