Gauhati High Court
Crl.Rev.P./433/2026 of ABDULLA FARUQUE TALUKDAR Vs HELMINA CHOUDHURY on 30 August 2026
GAHC010181662026 2026:GAU- AS:12524-DB THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./433/2026 ABDULLA FARUQUE TALUKDAR SON OF ABDUL LATIF TALUKDAR, R/O VILLAGE DUMURIA PT.-I, P.O. LENGTISINGA, P.S. ABHAYAPURI, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM,
GAHC010181662026
2026:GAU-
AS:12524-DB
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./433/2026
ABDULLA FARUQUE TALUKDAR
SON OF ABDUL LATIF TALUKDAR, R/O VILLAGE DUMURIA PT.-I, P.O.
LENGTISINGA, P.S. ABHAYAPURI, DIST. BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-
783384.
VERSUS
HELMINA CHOUDHURY
D/O MUSLEM UDDIN CHOUDHURY, R/O VILL. KHUDRAKUCHI, P.O.
BALAGAON, P.S. KALGACHIA, DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM, PIN-781319.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. M KHAN, MS J AKTAR
Advocate for the Respondent : ,
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJAN MONI KALITA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
Date : 31/08/2026 (Michael Zothankhuma, J)
1. Heard Mr. M. Khan, learned counsel for the Revision Petitioner, who has put to challenge the interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month, payable by him to the respondent-wife, pursuant to the impugned order dated 21/07/2026, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, in FC (Criminal) case no. 637/2024. The petitioner's counsel submits that the respondent has left the matrimonial home voluntarily and has refused to come back without giving any reason. As such, the respondent is not entitled to receive any maintenance in terms of section 144 (4) of the BNSS, as she refuses to live with her husband. Further, the respondent is a General Nursing and Midwifery (GNM) holder and as such, she can earn an independent income. He thus submits that interim impugned order, directing interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month to be paid to the respondent-wife should be set aside.
2. We have noticed that the main FC (Criminal) case no. 637/2024 is still pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta, and that vide order dated 21/07/2026, the petitioner is to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 10,000/- per month from the date of filing of the petition under Section 144 of BNSS. We have also noticed the evidence of the respondent-wife, which has been adduced before the learned Family Court, wherein she has stated that the petitioner and his family members have tortured her and driven her out from her matrimonial home, besides keeping all her Streedhan articles and testimonials relating to her academic life. Further, her husband had started torturing her mentally, alleging that she had physical deformity and that her legs were curved.
3. On considering the fact that the issue of whether the respondent is entitled to maintenance is being considered by the learned Family Court. Hence, as paragraph 5 of the impugned order dated 21/07/2026 states that the petitioner is presently drawing a monthly salary of approximately Rs. 39,000/-, we are of the view that the interim maintenance amount payable by the petitioner to the respondent-wife should be Rs. 9,000/- per month. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 21/07/2026 passed by the learned Family Court, is interfered with to the extent indicated above.
4. The petitioner will have to pay the interim maintenance amount of Rs. 9,000/- per month to the respondent-wife in terms of the impugned order, i.e. from the date of filing the petition under Section 144 BNSS.
5. The criminal petition is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant