Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010242342025 2026:GAU-AS:7457 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./451/2025 SAIDUR RAHMAN S/O AMZAD ALI MONDAL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - PIRADHARA, PART-II, P.O. - PIRADHARA, P.S. ABHAYAPURI, DISTRICT - BONGAIGAON, ASSAM, PIN VERSUS SAMSUN NEHAR W/O SAIDUR RAHMAN, R/O GUNIALGURI, P.S. - KALGACHIA, DISTRICT - BARPETA, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYA, MS ANKITA SAHARIA,MR S PAUL,MR. A BHATTACHARJEE,MS K TALUKDAR,MS. K MALAKAR Advocate for the Respondent : MR. R ALI, MS. S D HUSSAIN,MR. UDDYAN BHATTACHARYYA,MS A HUSSAIN,SABRISH AHMED,DARAK ULLAH,MS. N PERVIN,MR. MUSTAFA HUSSAIN BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER 29-05-2026 Heard Mr. A. Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Ullah, learned counsel for the respondent. Page No.# 2/5 2. This is an application filed by the petitioner under Sections 438/442 of the BNSS, 2023 praying for quashing and setting aside the impugned final order dated 22.09.2025, passed in F. C. (Crl.) No. 141/2021, whereby the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta allowed the petition filed under Section 125 CrPC and directed the petitioner/2nd party to pay monthly maintenance of Rs.8,500/- to the respondent/1st party and Rs.5,000/- to her minor daughter from the date of filing of the petition and also directed the petitioner to pay Rs.50,000/- as cost of the proceeding. 3. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned counsel submitted that he is regularly paying the monthly maintenance allowance of Rs.13,500/- as directed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta vide its final order dated 22.09.2025. But in the said order one observation is also made by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta that arrear maintenance stands at Rs.5,70,000/- and directed the petitioner to pay the said arrear amount in 3 (three) equal installments commencing from 18.11.2025. 4. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned counsel further submitted that at the time of passing the final order, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta did not consider assets and liabilities of the parties, neither any affidavit was furnished by the parties, nor those were considered. The order of maintenance was passed basically on the salary of the present petitioner, who is a retired army personnel, but, the earnings of the parties vis-à-vis the liability of the present petitioner was not at all considered at the time of passing the final order. However, till date, he had paid Rs.3,12,000/- including the arrear maintenance of Rs.2,31,000/- out of Rs.5,70,000/- as calculated by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpata. Page No.# 3/5 5. He further submitted that the present petitioner is paying the monthly maintenance @ Rs. 13,500/-, but the said amount was assessed without considering any assets and liabilities of the parties and hence, he submitted that re-assessment is required for the ends of justice. Mr. Bhattacharya, learned counsel accordingly submitted that the matter may be remanded back to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta with a direction for proper assessment of the maintenance amount after considering the assets and liabilities of both the parties. 6. Mr. D. Ullah, learned counsel for the respondent submitted in this regard that the maintenance allowance was considered on the basis of the income of the present petitioner, who is an army personnel and after his 2nd marriage only, he took voluntary retirement from his department. But at the time of institution of the maintenance case, the petitioner was in service. However, he admitted that at the time of passing the order the assets and liabilities of the parties were not considered by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta. 7. Mr. Ullah, learned counsel also agreed that the matter may be remanded back for re-assessment of the maintenance allowance in which event there is every probability of enhancement of the maintenance allowance after proper assessment of the income of the present petitioner. However, he submitted that the petitioner may be directed to pay regular monthly maintenance, till fresh assessment is done by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta. 8. Heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and I have also perused the case record. 9. It is a fact that the marriage and the paternity of the child of the respondent are not disputed and at the same time, it is also admitted fact that Page No.# 4/5 the present petitioner in paying monthly maintenance to the tune of Rs.13,500/- as assessed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta. At the same time, it is also seen that Rs.2,31,000/- has already been paid by the present petitioner out of total arrear amount of Rs.5,70,000/-. 10. The Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha and Anr., reported in (2021) 2 SCC 32 and provided some guidelines while dealing with the case of maintenance and as per the guideline that “the party claiming the maintenance either as a spouse, or as partner in a civil union, live-in relationship, common law marriage, should be required to file a concise application for interim maintenance with limited pleadings, along with an Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities before the concerned Court, as a mandatory requirement”. 11. But here in the instant case, it is an admitted position that the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta did not consider the assets and liabilities of the parties and it is admitted that neither of the parties filed any assets and liability statement before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta and the maintenance allowance was assessed purely on the basis of the salary of the present petitioner. But the other liabilities of the petitioner seems to be not considered at the time of passing the order. 12. So considering as these aspects of the case and also considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the matter may be remanded back to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta for fresh assessment of the maintenance allowance and both the parties are also herby directed to furnish their assets and liability on affidavit before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta so that the proper assessment can be done for the maintenance allowance. Page No.# 5/5 13. In view of above, the impugned final order dated 22.09.2025 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta in F.C. (Crl.) Case No. 141/2021 is hereby set aside and quashed and the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta will make a fresh assessment of the maintenance allowance on the basis of the pleadings and the evidence filed by the parties, giving opportunity to both the parties to file their assets and liability statement before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta. 14. Further, it is also directed to the petitioner that he shall continue to pay Rs.13,500/- till the fresh assessment is done by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta. 15. Both the parties are hereby directed to appear before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barpeta on 15.06.2026 with their respective assets and liability statement. 16. With the above observation and direction this criminal revision petition stands disposed of. 17. Return the Trial Court Record forthwith. JUDGE Comparing Assistant