IN THE LD.

COURT OF SESSIONS JUDGE, BURDWA N

CRI. MOTION NO.___________/19

(Arising out of order dated 14-03-2019 of Misc Case No. 287/16
as passed by the Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6th Court, Burdwan)

Arpita Rakshit, Aged about years

W/o Sudipta Rakshit
D/o Satyanarayan Singha
Presently residing under the
Care of father Satyanarayan Singha
Purbasa Pally
Guskara, P.S. Ausgram
District Purba Barddhaman – 713124
………….………….Petitioner

– Versus –

1) Sutpita Rakshit, aged about years

S/o Subir Rakshit
Of Dhutadanga Road
Rampurhat, P.S. Rampurhat
District Birbhum
Office address:
ASP HQ
Nadia North Division
P.O. Krishnanagar
District Nadia – 741101

2) The State of West Bengal

…………………….Opposite Party

Application under section 397/399 Criminal Procedure Code

The humble petition of the petitioner

in this case;
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH: -
1. That the petitioner is a bonafide citizen of the state.
2. That your petitioner is the legally married wife of the Opposite Party No. 1.
3. That the petitioner came from a respectable middle class family and the marriage in
between the revisionist and the Opposite Party No.1 was a negotiated one and in the
marriage the father of the revisionist had to spend several lacs of Rupees to meet the
demand of the Opposite Party No.1 and his parents.
4. That after marriage the couple lived together as husband and wife comfortably and
during living there was cohabitation for many times and the marriage was
consummated but the revisionist did not conceive even during the last stay together.
5. That unfortunately the Opposite Party and his family members tried to heckle the
revisionist in the trifling matters and the revisionist tried to adjust sacrificing a lot but
the intensity of torture knew no bound even at the office quarter at Kandi till before one
month before the date of departure.
6. That all on a sudden the attitude of the Opposite Party No.1 changed when he heard of
his order of transfer received at Kandi and he went on behavioring well allowing the
petitioner to go to the market for shopping, visiting cinema hall, taking food at
restaurant and went on enjoying the marital life merrily and that remained for few
weeks and asked the petitioner to remain beside her ailing father at Guskara for seven
to ten days although revisionlist desired to stay there in the matter of helping the
Opposite Party to shift the family at Baharampore, Murshidabad i.e. at the place of
transfer but the Opposite Party No.1 confidently assured the revisionist not to get
worried and he would arrange to take all articles of the revisionist alongwith others and
the petitioner accepted the same honestly and went to father’s place in normal course
and it is the Opposite Party No.1 who accompanied the revisionist in the same bus from
Kandi and there after the revisionlist and the Opposite Party No.1 left for Guskara and
Rampurhat respectively and virtually the revisionist was emotional at that time towards
the Opposite Party No.1.
7. That it was a bolt from blue that soon after arrival at father’s place the revisionist got a
notice of divorce filed by the Opposite Party at Rampurhat Court while the revisionist
was in the office quarter where the Opposite Party No.1 posted and felt each and every
event of the last few weeks of the government quarter at Kandi was made cunningly
and surreptitiously and inspite of her best efforts she was not allowed to live.
8. That the revisionist preferred a petition for restitution for conjugal rights under section
9 of Hindu Marriage Act at the Ld. Court of District Judge at Burdwan and the same is
pending for disposal.
9. That with a very heavy heart the petitioner had to prefer an application for maintenance
under section 125 Code of Criminal Procedure as she has no income for her livelihood
and she was neglected and refused to send any money for her maintenance although the
Opposite Party No.1 holds a high rank in the office of Indian Postal Department under
Government of India and drews a salary of decent figure of Rs. 70,000/- Per month.
10. That the Opposite Party No.1 played tricks althrough and in a planned way proceeded
to create grounds for divorce as well as to avoid the maintenance as per his status.
11. That there has been a complete suppression of income at Ld. Lower Court.
12. That the revisionist is the only dependent upon the Opposite Party No.1 as legally
married wife.
13. That the father of the Opposite Party No.1 was a serviceman earlier and he has a two
storied building at Rampurhat and leads active life and he has got heavy bank balance
too.
14. That all the stridhan properties including all gold ornaments of 20bhories were kept by
the parents of the Opposite Party No.1 on trust apart from the valuable articles at
quarter and those were attempted to be swallowed committing breach of trust.
15. That the petition for interim maintenance was disposed of on 14-03-2019 by the Ld.
Court of Judicial Magistrate,6th Court, Burdwan allowing Rs. 7,000/- (Rupees Seven
Thousand) only from the date of order which is too meagre and being aggrieved with
the same your revisionist prefers to file this revisional application within prescribed
period on the following grounds amongst other.
G R O U N D S
i) For that the impugned order as passed by the Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6 th Court,
Burdwan is illegal, improper, incorrect and without jurisdiction and against the
materials on record;
ii) For that the Ld. Lower Court failed to appreciate the mater from proper perspective;
iii) For that the Ld. Lower Court failed to consider that the pay slip of the Opposite Party
No.1 was not filed in the Ld. Court only to suppress the income as gross salary;
iv) For that the Ld. Lower Court failed to consider that nothing was sent as maintenance
during the running of the proceeding in Ld. Court by the Opposite Party No. 1 and
premium to the Opposite Party No.1 was granted by the Ld. Lower Court;
v) For that the Ld. Lower Court failed to consider that the legally married wife is also
entitled to maintain the same status as of the Opposite Party/husband;
vi) For that the Ld. Lower Court ought to have considered that Rs. 600/- to Rs. 700/- is
required to run the daily life of a legally married wife during these hard days i.e. Rs.
18,000/- Per month or so is of immense necessity;
vii) For that the Ld. Lower Court failed to consider that whatever lesser amount be passed
that ought to have been given effect from the date of application at least;
viii) For that the Ld. Lower Court failed to consider that litigation cost as provided in the
statute is to be passed in the interest of justice;
 ix) For that in any view of the matter the order of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 7,000/-
(Rupees Seven Thousand) is too meagre and ought to have been increased;
x) For that the revisional application is a bonafide one;
Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances it is
most humbly prayed that your Honour would be
kind enough to:-
i) admit the petition;
ii) issue notice upon O.P.’s;
iii) call for the record of Misc Case No. 287/16 as
passed by the Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 6 th
Court, Burdwan;
iv) allow the revisional application enhancing the
amount of maintenance from Rs. 7,000/- to
Rs. 18,000/- (Rupees Eighteen Thousand) Per
month from the date of application after
hearing both sides;
v) allow litigation cost to the tune of Rs. 20,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Thousand) only after hearing
both sides

or
Drafted by me
& Pass such other order/orders as your Honour
Typed in my office
may deem fit and proper.

Advocate And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray.