10.9.2026 Court No.34 Sl. No.7 sg CRR 4203 of 2024 With CRAN 1 of 2024 In the matter of : Moumita Sarkar Mr. Abhijit Chakraborty …for the petitioner. Mr. Dipayan Kundu …for the O.P./husband. 1. The instant revisional application has been filed under Section 482 of CR.P.C. corresponding to Section 528 of BNS, 2023 seeking an enhancement of interim maintenance against an order dated 5th August, 2023 by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Hooghly in Criminal Revision No. 51 of 2023 in connection with the Misc. Case No.34 of 2018 under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.. 2. The factual matrix as can be found from the materials on record is that the parties got married on December 7, 2004 observing Hindu Rights and Customs and the said marriage was duly registered and they were blessed with a male child on April 18, 2011. Thereafter dispute arose between the parties in connection with their matrimonial relations as a result the present petitioner and her minor son compelled to leave the house of the opposite party no.1 in the year 2016 on the ground of physical 2 and mental torture by him. The Misc. Case no. 5 of 2018 was filed under Section 12 of PWDV Act by the petitioner with interim relief and the Learned Judicial Magistrate Hooghly, Sadar vide order dated May 1st, 2018 granted order of residence and the petitioner since then entered into the ground floor of the building with the assistance of the Baranagar Police and is residing at the house of the opposite party no.1 with her minor son. 3. It is her specific contention that the opposite party no.2 did not spend a single penny for her and only provided some amount towards school fees for the minor child. The present petitioner has averred that the amount as received towards maintenance was not sufficient for her maintenance and she had to borrow money from her parents who are retired government employees. 4. The opposite party no.2 thereafter filed Mat Suit before the learned Additional District Judge, Barrackpore under Hindu Marriage Act, 1954 praying for dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and desertion, where present petitioner filed one application for interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The further contention made on behalf of the petitioner that the husband never furnished the bank statement despite specific direction by the learned Trial Court. Having no other alternative the present petitioner filed an application under Section 125 of CR.P.C. on December 1, 2018 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Hooghly praying for Rs. 3 2,00,000/- per month as maintenance and an interim maintenance of Rs. 1,25,000/- per month other than litigation cost. 5. Petitioner also filed an application under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate which was later on transferred before the Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Chinsurah, Hooghly where an amount of interim order of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 10,000/- per month was allowed to be paid on 1.5.2018 . The revisional application was filed by the petitioner against the said order for enhancement of the amount and the Learned Court enhanced such amount from Rs 10.000/- to 13,000/-. 6. The petitioner preferred another revisional application assailing such order before the Learned District and Session Judge Hooghly whereby the order of Learned Magistrate passed in the proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C - was affirmed. A criminal revisional application being CRR 1166 of 2022 was filed against such order before this court and the Learned Co-ordinate Bench directed the parties to file the Affidavit of assets before the Learned Trial Court. 7. In terms of such direction the parties filed their respective Affidavit and the Learned Court considering the facts and circumstances of the case enhanced such amount of monthly 4 maintenance up to Rs. 15,000/- per month on December 29, 2022. 8. The materials on record further reveals that petitioner was already favoured with the interim relief of Rs. 13,000/- per month as ordered by in a proceeding under PWDV Act and Rs. 10,000/- by the order dated May 1st, 2018 which was Rs. 13,000/- per month vide order dated December 29, 2022 later on enhanced to Rs 15,000/- . Despite such order the present opposite party/husband failed and neglected to comply with the order by paying monthly maintenance and paid according to his whims and caprice resulting accumulation of Rs. 1,72,000 towards outstanding dues as on 31.8.2026. 9. Learned advocate representing the petitioner submits that the opposite party no.1 filed affidavit of assets without giving any bank details which was objecteds because filing of bank statement is mandatory pursuant to the judgement delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh Vs. Neha .It is further alleged that the opposite party has sufficient income and is running cable business and two broad brand services having 100 lines approximately and the amount of maintenance granted in favour of the petitioner are not in accordance with the status of the opposite party no.1. 10. That apart learned Court while passing the order of maintenance did not consider the amount of litigation costs. 5 Accordingly prayed for enhancement of the maintenance and also for passing appropriate order directing the respondent to pay outstanding dues in her favour. 11. Learned advocate representing the opposite party, on the other hand, raises objection and deny the amount of maintenance as claimed to be due and payable. However, it appears that in utter negligence to the order passed by this Court on September 9, 2026 directing the husband to submit a chart showing the actual payment he has not placed any written instruction from his client. Learned advocate failed to substantiate the amount actually paid in connection with the proceeding or the dispute raised on behalf of the petitioner. Before the Learned Court also he did not filed the Bank statement despite specific direction. 12. Therefore Court is of the considered view that the husband since the inception of the proceeding initiated was reluctant to disclose his actual income which being his personal knowledge he is bound to disclose and should come before the court in clean hand otherwise an adverse inference can be drawn against him that he intended to suppress his actual income. Since the income of the husband to be decided by the Learned Court at the time of final hearing of the proceeding while deciding the entitlement of the petitioner /wife to claim maintenance at the 6 time of hearing of the case after assessing the evidences to be adduced by the parties. 13. The order passed on 1st August, 2023 by the learned Sessions Judge, Hooghly reflects that an amount of Rs. 15,000/- per month was allowed for the time being as interim order of maintenance as an objection was raised regarding the income as alleged by the petitioner by the husband. This Court is also of the view that the petitioner has filed several litigations as well as maintenance application in different proceedings which being clubbed together would of Rs. 13,000 + Rs. 15,000. In terms of the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rajnish Vs. Neha the objective of granting interim/permanent maintenance is to ensure that the dependent spouse is not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of the failure to of the marriage and not as a punishment to other spouse .It was also observed that where successive claims for maintenance are made by a party under different statutes ,the court would consider an adjustment or set off , of the amount awarded in the previous proceedings ,while determining whether any further amount is to be awarded in the subsequent proceeding . 14. In this case on consideration this court is of the view that an amount of Rs. 15,000/- is to be paid by the husband as lastly directed in connection of under Section 125 proceeding The husband has failed to follow the direction passed by this court 7 and further did not filed the bank statement. The amount towards maintenance was earlier enhanced from Rs 10.000/- to Rs 15000/- and such order was never challenged. 15. Considering the entire factual scenario coupled with the fact that the husband has deliberately tried to suppress his actual income when the wife is continuously challenging the quantum of maintenance alleging more income of the husband, this court is of the view that the interim order passed by the Learned court is required to be modified to the extent the amount of maintenance granted in favour of the petitioner. 16. Accordingly husband is directed to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month per month as interim maintenance so long the final amount is not determined however such excess amount of Rs. 5,000/- to be paid from the passing of this order . 17. From the chart placed before this Court, an outstanding amount of Rs. 1,72,000/- can be found to be due and payable for which an execution case has been filed . This court gives an opportunity to clear the dues so accumulated till passing of this order at the rate of Rs. 15000/- per month in the following manner;- 18. The husband is directed pay the outstanding amount in four installments and first of such amount to be paid will be of Rs. 50,000/- by 30th September, 2026 along with the current amount of Rs. 20,000/- . The second installment to be paid by 14 8 October, 2026 of the same amount (Rs. 20,000/- plus Rs. 50,000/-) and the rest amount to be paid in between November 30th and 31st December, 2026. 19. The petitioner is directed not to proceed with the execution case further in the event the husband comply with the order as directed in default the Learned Magistrate will proceed with the execution case in accordance with law. The amount of litigation costs prayed for is not considered as of now the same will be decided by the learned Trial Court at the time of final hearing. 20. According this revisional application stands allowed in part. 21. All parties shall act on the server copy of this order duly downloaded from the official website of this Hon’ble High Court. [Chaitali Chatterjee (Das), J.]