19.08.2026 Ct. No. 30 Sl. No.2 skg CRLCP 18 of 2025 Hasna Banu Bibi Vs. Sundar Ali Sk. In CRR 2225 of 2022 Hasna Banu Bibi Vs. Sundar Ali Sk. In CRR 2545 of 2022 Sundar Ali Sk @ Sundar Ali Sheikh Vs. Hasna Banu Bibi Mr. Ayan Bhattacharjee, Sr. Adv. Ms. Ritu Das, Adv. Mr. Suman Majumdar, Adv. …for the petitioner Mr. Kallol Basu, Adv. Mr. Atreya Chakraborty, Adv. …for the alleged contemnor 1. The criminal contempt application has been preferred alleging willful, intentional, deliberate and contumacious violation and disobedience of order dated 15th May, 2024 passed by this Court in CRR 2225 of 2022 (Hasna Banu Bibi v. Sundar Ali Sk.) thereby directing the opposite party/husband to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month to the petitioner/wife from June, 2024 onwards in connection with Criminal Misc. Case no. 174 of 2024 under Section 125(3) and 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. Rule has been issued and the alleged contemnor is present in person. 3. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on perusal of the materials on record, it appears that after the order of which violation has been alleged the matter was before the ACJM, Kalna, 2 Purba Bardhaman in Misc. Case no.174 of 2024 and on considering the judgment and order of which violation has been alleged, the learned Magistrate has passed the impugned order dated 03.03.2025 and the said order has been challenged in an another writ application being CRR 5003 of 2025. 4. On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties it also appears that it is the case of the alleged contemnor before the learned Magistrate that an excess amount has already been paid to the petitioner herein, which is to be adjusted against the payment to be made. The said fact was considered by the learned Magistrate while passing the order dated 03.03.2025. 5. Accordingly, this Court finds that there is prima facie no violation of the impugned order as alleged, considering that the order has been passed on the basis of the impugned order of which violation has been alleged by the learned Magistrate and the same has been passed considering the impugned judgment herein. 6. Accordingly, no prima facie case of contempt is made out and the contempt proceeding be dropped. 7. The personal appearance of the alleged contemnor is dispensed with. 8. CRLCP 18 of 2025 stands disposed of. 9. There shall be no order as to costs. 10. Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties on an urgent basis. [Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.]