Not A Mere Breach Of Contract: Telangana High Court Refuses To Quash FIR In ₹73 Crore Garment Investment Fraud Accused Not Entitled To Copies Of 'Unrelied' Upon Documents At The Stage Of Framing Of Charges Under Section 91 CrPC: Supreme Court Elected Representatives Have No Privilege To Resort To Violence; Criminal Antecedents Are Material For Bail Adjudication: Supreme Court Mere Absence Of Transport Documents Does Not Create A Presumption Of Violation Of Chhattisgarh Agricultural Cattle Preservation Act, 2004: Supreme Court Section 396 IPC | Conviction For 'Dacoity With Murder' Requires Proof That Murder Was Committed In The Course Of Dacoity: Allahabad High Court 'Developers Cannot Delay Conveyance For Eternity And Milk Additional FSI Benefits': Bombay High Court Upholds Societies' Deemed Conveyance Pre-Approval Statutory Dues Stand Extinguished Upon Approval Of Resolution Plan; GST Authorities Cannot Initiate Fresh Proceedings: Calcutta High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell With Delivery Of Possession Is Admissible In A Suit For Specific Performance: Delhi High Court Stigmatic Order Discharging Probationer Without Inquiry Is Void For Violation Of Natural Justice: Gujarat High Court Execution Proceedings | Court Cannot Impose Arbitrary Financial Conditions Without Reason In Stay Applications: Himachal Pradesh High Court Section 528 BNSS | High Court Cannot Exercise Inherent Powers To Circumvent Statutory Bar Against Second Revision: Delhi High Court Advocate Empanelment | Restriction On Multiple Applications Is A Procedural Choice Within Employer’s Domain: Delhi High Court Acquittal Appeal | Double Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Cannot Be Disturbed Merely Because Another View Is Possible: Gujarat High Court SC/ST Act | Offence Under Section 3(1)(g) Not Attracted If Dispossession Or Interference Is Not Due To Victim's Caste: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judicial Officer Must Maintain Distance From Practicing Advocates To Avoid Impropriety: Gujarat High Court Upholds Dismissal Section 183 BNSS | Investigating Officer Cannot Independently Record Further Statement Of Victim After Recording Before Magistrate: Karnataka High Court Non-Production Of Case Property And Missing Link Evidence In Seizure Cases Vitiates Prosecution: Himachal Pradesh High Court Employees Compensation Act | Death Due To Cardiac Arrest During Employment Is An 'Accident' Arising Out Of Stress And Strain Of Duty: J&K High Court Transfer Of Proceedings | Courts Must Issue Fresh Notice To Parties Even If They Had Appeared Before The Transferor Court: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Award Section 80P(4) IT Act Does Not Deny Deduction To Regional Rural Banks As They Retain The 'Deemed Co-operative Society' Status Under Section 22 RRB Act: Madras High Court Property Purchased In Name Of Child For Family Benefit Is Not A 'Benami Transaction' Under Section 2(9) Of The 1988 Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court Person Without Caveatable Interest Cannot Challenge Will Or Seek Revocation Of Probate: Madras High Court Divorce | Cruelty Must Be Assessed By Cumulative Effect Of Matrimonial Conduct Rather Than Isolated Incidents: Orissa High Court Merely Labeling Insurance Policy As Comprehensive Does Not Create Unlimited Liability: MP High Court Order VII Rule 11 CPC | Plaint Must Be Rejected If Limitation Bar Is Apparent From Face Of Pleadings: Patna High Court Limitation Act | 'Sufficient Cause' Cannot Be Used To Revive Stale Or Dead Claims By State: Orissa High Court Quashes Order Condoning 53-Year Delay Employee Cannot Remain Dormant Like Rip Van Winkle & Awaken At Convenience: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Stale Service Plea With ₹25K Cost Section 29 NDPS Act | Mere Allegation Of 'Cooperation' Without Specific Overt Acts Cannot Sustain Charge Of Conspiracy: Rajasthan High Court Forest Land Status Does Not Extinguish Private Civil Title: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Decree For Possession Once Admitted In Evidence, Document Cannot Be De-Marked On Grounds Of Insufficiency Of Stamp Duty: Telangana High Court Section 190 BNSS | Mere Presence In Unlawful Assembly With Active Intent Renders Member Vicariously Liable For Homicidal Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court Contributory Negligence Under Motor Vehicles Act Cannot Be Inferred Without Cogent Evidence: Telangana High Court Enhances Compensation Motor Vehicles Act | Section 164 Compensation Of Rs. 5 Lakhs Applicable Even To Pending Claims Arising Prior To 2019 Amendment: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consumer Protection Act | Builder Liable To Pay Interest For Delayed Possession Despite Force Majeure Plea If Agreement Executed Post-Outbreak: State Commission

Patna High Court Partially Allows Criminal Revision Challenging Maintenance Order; Adverse Inference Drawn from DNA Test Refusal

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Patna High Court, presided over by Honorable Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman, partially allowed a criminal revision petition challenging a maintenance order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gaya. The petitioner, represented by Mr. Syed Alamdar Hussain and Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, sought to set aside the order that directed him to pay maintenance allowances to his wife and child.

The case revolved around a dispute between the petitioner and his wife, who had been residing with her father in Village Barki Takia (Rasalpur), P.S.-Chandauti, District-Gaya. The order in question, passed on April 18, 2016, granted maintenance allowances of Rs. 6,000/- and Rs. 2,000/- per month to the wife and child, respectively, under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), effective from the date of the order. The maintenance allowance for the child was to continue until he reached the age of majority.

During the proceedings, the petitioner contended that the child in question was not his biological child and requested a DNA test to establish paternity. The court, acknowledging the petitioner's claim, ordered the DNA test. However, it was revealed that the wife initially agreed to undergo the test but subsequently refused. This refusal led the court to draw an adverse inference against the wife.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that the adverse inference, combined with the wife's refusal to undergo the DNA test, indicated that she was involved in an adulterous relationship, disqualifying her from seeking any maintenance under Section 125(4) of the Cr.P.C. The counsel relied on a report from the Forensic Science Laboratory, Hyderabad, which allegedly supported the contention that the wife and child were not cooperative in carrying out the DNA test.

Examining the evidence and arguments presented, the court concluded that while adverse inference could be drawn from the wife's refusal to undergo the DNA test, it did not conclusively establish her alleged adulterous relationship. As a result, the court ruled that the adverse inference should only affect the wife's entitlement to maintenance, but not serve as conclusive proof of adultery.

Considering the circumstances, including the admitted marital relationship between the petitioner and the wife, the court held that the wife was entitled to maintenance as provided under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. The court deemed the maintenance allowance of Rs. 6,000/- per month reasonable and declined to interfere with this aspect of the order. However, taking into account the child's refusal to undergo the DNA test, the court set aside the maintenance allowance of Rs. 2,000/- per month granted to the child.

In its final ruling, the Patna High Court partly allowed the criminal revision application, upholding the maintenance allowance of Rs. 6,000/- per month for the wife, but setting aside the maintenance allowance of Rs. 2,000/- per month for the child.

Date: May 11, 2023

 

Latest Legal News