Baleshwar Mandal Vs. Anup Mandal

Baleshwar Mandal vs Anup Mandal

Disposition Revision dismissed Court Jharkhand Decided Jan 16, 2006

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/519128

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/519128
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Judge: N. Dhinakar, C.J.
Decided On: Jan 16, 2006
Case Number: Cr. Revision No. 336 of 2005
Subject: Criminal
Disposition: Revision dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- CONSTITUTION OF INDIA. Articles 12 & 226: [M. Karpaga Vinayagam, C.J., Narendra Nath Tiwari & D.P.Singh, JJ] Writ petition - Maintainability - Whether State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd., is a State within meaning of Article 12 ? - Held, From perusal of relevant Rules of byelaws, it is clear that St...

Key legal issue: Criminal
Outcome / disposition: Revision dismissed
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 125

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Baleshwar Mandal

Advocate K. Purnima, Adv.

Respondent

Anup Mandal

Advocate A.P.P.

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 125
Reported In: 2(2006)DMC265

Excerpt

- constitution of india. articles 12 & 226: [m. karpaga vinayagam, c.j., narendra nath tiwari & d.p.singh, jj] writ petition - maintainability - whether state co-operative milk producers federation ltd., is a state within meaning of article 12 ? - held, from perusal of relevant rules of byelaws, it is clear that state government has no role to play either in policy decision for raising funds for federation or its expenditure and thus have no financial control. further there is nothing to indicate that government has any functional and administrative control over federation. state government has no role to play in matter of appointment of any of officials of federation including managing director. federation is totally independent in all respects and in no way subservient to state government in conduct of its business. federation in no way can be termed as agency of state government and does not come within meaning of article 12 of constitution. writ petitions against federation is not maintainable. .....two different versions one before the criminal court and the other before the family court and according to the counsel, in the first information report, of which a criminal case was lodged against the petitioner, p.w. 4 has stated that after the rape was committed she continued to have relationship with the petitioner but gave a different version before the family court by coming out with a version that the child was born on account of rape committed upon her by the petitioner. therefore, counsel contends that the evidence of p.w. 4 ought not to have accepted by the family court for awarding maintenance to sole o.p., anup mandal who is the illegitimate child of the petitioner.4. 1 am unable to accept the said contention since there is no material placed before the family court for arriving at a conclusion that the p.w. 4 gave different version-one before the criminal court and the other before the family court and in the absence of any evidence this court cannot go into the questions of fact on the basis of oral submissions made by the counsel before the revisional forum. on going through the order of the family court 1 find that there is no illegality or irregularity in the order.5. the revision is, therefore, dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

N. Dhinakar, C.J.

1. Baleshwar Mandal. the petitioner herein, was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 500 p.m. as maintenance under Section 125, Cr. P.C. to his illegitimate child. The petitioner is aggrieved by the said order of the Family Court.

2. Anup Mandal filed a petition through his mother, Malti Devi in the Family Court, Dumka. In the said petition it has been alleged that the petitioner in this revision committed rape on Malti Devi, who has been examined as P.W. 4, on account of which she became pregnant and delivered a child who is O.P. No. 1. The Family Court considering the evidence placed before it directed the petitioner, Baleshwar Mandal to pay a sum of Rs. 500 as maintenance to his illegitimate child under Section 125, Cr. P.C. and directed that the said amount should be paid from the date of the application.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner strenuously contends that P.W. 4 gave two different versions one before the Criminal Court and the other before the Family Court and according to the Counsel, in the First Information Report, of which a criminal case was lodged against the petitioner, P.W. 4 has stated that after the rape was committed she continued to have relationship with the petitioner but gave a different version before the Family Court by coming out with a version that the child was born on account of rape committed upon her by the petitioner. Therefore, Counsel contends that the evidence of P.W. 4 ought not to have accepted by the Family Court for awarding maintenance to sole O.P., Anup Mandal who is the illegitimate child of the petitioner.

4. 1 am unable to accept the said contention since there is no material placed before the Family Court for arriving at a conclusion that the P.W. 4 gave different version-one before the Criminal Court and the other before the Family Court and in the absence of any evidence this Court cannot go into the questions of fact on the basis of oral submissions made by the Counsel before the Revisional Forum. On going through the order of the Family Court 1 find that there is no illegality or irregularity in the order.

5. The revision is, therefore, dismissed.

Same Court & Year Jharkhand · 2006 Same Parties Baleshwar Mandal vs Anup Mandal Same Subject Criminal Same Judge N. Dhinakar, C.J. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 125

Criminal