IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.5916 of 2008 HASSNAIN AZIM @ MD.HASNAIN AAZIM Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR & 2. SHAISTA USMANI ----------- 7 22.04.2010. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner, who is husband of the victim prays for quashing of order dated 15.6.2007, passed in Matrimonial case no. 73 of 2006 filed by his wife Opp.party no. no.2 before the Principal Judge, Family court, Darbhanga, whereby the learned judged was pleased to allow a petition filed by her under section 125 Cr.P.C. and directed the petitioner to make payment of Rs. 5,000/- per month with effect from 28.8.2006. Counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier he filed a petition for restoration of conjugal right bearing matrimonial case no. 52 of 2006. He further submits that Opp.party no. 2 could not be entitled to maintenance as she has left his place without sufficient reasons. He submits that had the order not been ex-parte, he could have show to the court that Opp. party no. 2 left the place without sufficient cause. He submits that he works with Pawan Hans Helicopters and does not deny that he receives a salary over Rs.20,000/-. He also does not deny that he has a house in Bombay and joint house in Muzaffarpur. He further submits that he is continuously staying in Bombay on account of his employment in Pawan Hans Helicopters, as such, he did not receive any notice regarding issuance of instant proceeding. Counsel for Opp. party no. 2 submits that as the - 2 - petitioner had given his Muzaffarpur address in the Matrimonial suit, as such, the same address had been given on the petition filed under section 125 Cr.P.C. read with section 7(2)(a) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. Plea of the petitioner is that he did not receive notice as he continuously stayed in Bombay on account of his assignment with the Pawan Hans Helicopters. In these circumstances, this Court remands the matter to the Principal judge, Family court, to provide him an opportunity of leading evidence, subject to further payment of sum of Rs. 5000/- towards cost of litigation to Opp. party no. 2. She would be entitled to cross examine and lead further evidence, if it is so advised. The petitioner would continue to pay the maintenance amount as fixed by the Family judge with effect from 28.6.2008. Petitioner submits that he has already paid Rs.1,20,000/- which would cover period of maintenance from 28.8.2006 to 28.8.2008. The petitioner would pay the balance arrears of maintenance since September, 2008 up till now within a period of four months form today. Apart from this, he would continue to pay the current maintenance amount, subject to final adjudication. With aforesaid directions, this application is remanded to leaned Principal judge, Family court, Darbhanga. Shashi. (Samarendra Pratap Singh,J.)