LIST OF DATES

19.02.96 That Petitioner, Deboki Sarkar, married to Subash

Chandra Biswas, O.P., under Special Marriage Act, 1954
with due observance of legal formalities and since then
started residing with O.P. sometime in tenanted
premises and sometimes at the house of O.P. Marriage
Certificate is annexed hereto as Annexure P-1 at
pages___
However, few days of her marriage O.P. started
torturing the Petitioner mentally and physically; of
these facts the Petitioner lodged complaint before
Public Grievance Cell, D.M. Office at Barasat.
09.07.96 That by assaulting the Petitioner seriously, she was
droven out of her marital home, of these facts the
Petitioner also lodged dairy to that effect in the local
P.S.
29.07.96 That a written complaint u/s 498A/406 of IPC was filed
before C.J.M. Barasat stating all the facts of
misappropriation and continued torture upon her which
is still pending in the Court of Ld. S.D.J.M, Barasat a
copy of written complaint is annexed hereto as
Annexure P-2 at pages____
1996

That a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage was

filed by the O.P. against the Petitioner before Munsif
Court bearing T.S. Case No. 206/96, however, when it
came to the knowledge of the Petitioner it was
withdrawn.

02.08.96 That a compromise deed was executed between

Petitioner and O.P. at Womens Investigation Cell,
Barasat P.S. and in compliance whereof the Petitioner
went with O.P.
It is pertinent to mention here that during the period of
08.09.96 to 10.09.96 the Petitioner lead her life in
continuous torture and had to pass her days on
starvation and toiletry facilities were denied, further she
was locked in room ultimately O.P. drove Petitioner out
from his house after assaulting her mercilessly.
07.08.98 That finding no alternative to survive as the Petitioner
was ousted by O.P. she filed a case for maintenance
before Ld. C.J.M, Barasat bearing case no. M 427/1998 a
copy of maintenance petition is annexed hereto as
Annexure P-3 at pages____

24.02.99 That the Ld. C.J.M. ordered interim maintenance of Rs.

600 per month to the Petitioner a copy of order dt.
24.02.99 is annexed hereto as Annexure P-4 at
pages____
19.05.99 That the O.P. with the intention to defer payment of
such minimal amount of Rs. 600 filed stay before Zila
Judge, against order dt. 24.02.99 bearing Criminal
Motion Case NO. 164/1999, however, order dt.
24.02.99 was stayed.
It is pertinent to mention here that the order for stay
was passed without any hearing on a matter to
something as basic as maintenance which imparts
necessity of ones survival, without hearing is extremely
unjustified and unfair.
10.06.99 That the Ld. C.J.M. issued D.W. a copy of D.W. is
annexed hereto as Annexure P-5 at pages____
That a Criminal Revision (CRR No. 2422/2001) against
the order dated 19.05.99 was filed by the Petitioner a
copy of Criminal Revision is annexed hereto as
Annexure P-6 at pages____
07.12.01 That Honble High Court allowed interim order of
maintenance thereby dismissing the order of dt.
19.05.99 copy of said order is annexed hereto as
Annexure P-7 at pages____
22.02.02 That on a recall petition by the O.P. and the order
passed on 07.12.01 by the Honble High Court was
cancelled thereby restoring the order dated 19.05.99
without hearing the Petitioner and further ordered the
matter to continue at ADJ Court
19.03.04 That Ld. CJM, Barasat allowed petition for maintenance
on contest and ordered O.P. for maintenance Rs. 1500
per month to the Petitioner from the date of filing of
application u/s 125 Cr.P.C. a copy of order dt. 19.03.04
order is annexed hereto as Annexure P-8 at pages____
It is pertinent to mention here that the order of
maintenance was effective from the date of application
and it was observed that the Petitioner at present is not
in any service and was not able to maintain herself.
12.05.04 That the O.P. once again with the intention to defer
payment of such minimal amount of Rs. 1500 filed stay
before Zila Judge, against order dt. 19.03.04 bearing

Criminal Case No. 140/2004. However, on the same

date amount of Rs. 1500 was reduced to Rs. 1250 till
the hearing of this stay petition.
It is pertinent to mention here that such reduction from
Rs. 1500 to Rs. 1250 was passed without any hearing
on a matter to something as basic as maintenance
which imparts necessity of ones survival, without
hearing is extremely unjustified and unfair.

29.07.04 That due to difficulty in life expectancy an application

for enhancement of maintenance to the extent of half
salary and also requested to verify the salary of the O.P.
was made by the Petitioner a copy of such application is
annexed hereto as Annexure P-9 at pages____
20.08.14 That while entertaining the petition for enhancement
the Ld. J.M, 2nd Court enhanced from Rs. 1500 to Rs.
8500 per months, however, it was held the said amount
was payable from the date of order i.e, from 20.08.14
without taking into consideration that such amount
must be payable from the date of application.
Nov, 2014Being dissatisfied and aggrieved by the order of Ld. J.M,
2nd Court dt. 20.08.14 thereby allowing the same in part
and directing the enhanced amount of maintenance
shall effect from the date of passing of order i.e,
20.08.2014 instead of filing of application i.e, 29.07.04
the Petitioner filed an appeal before Hon'ble High Court
at Calcutta a copy of such petition is annexed hereto as
Annexure P-9 at pages____
10.04.15 That Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta in C.R.R. No. 3498
of 2014 set aside the impugned order dt. 20.08.14 and
partly allowed the application thereby enhance
maintenance from Rs. 8500 to Rs. 12000 from the date
of order by of Ld. J.M, 2nd Court dt. 20.08.14. However,
the Hon'ble High Court failed to appreciate the fact put
by the petitioner to allow such claim of maintenance
from the date of application, which left the Petitioner in
hardship. A copy of order of High Court is annexed
hereto as Annexure P-10 at pages____
.07.15

Hence the present Special Leave Petition.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

[S.C.R. Order XXI Rule 3(1) (a)]
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION
(Under Article 136 of the Constitution of India)
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.

OF 2015

(Against the Judgment and Final order dated 10.04.2015 passed in

C.R.R. No. 3498 of 2014 by the Ld. Single Judge of the Honble
High Court at Calcutta)

BETWEEN

POSITION OF THE
PARTIES
In the High Court

In

this
Hon
ble Court
Debaki Sarkar (Biswas),
Wife
of
Sri
Chandra
R/o____________

Petitioner

Petitioner

Subash
Biswas,

AND
Subash Chandra Biswas
_________________

Opposite
Party

Contesting
Respondent
No.1

TO,
THE HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA
AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF
THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA.

THE

HUMBLE

PETITION

OF

THE

PETITIONER ABOVENAMED
MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH :1.

That the petitioner herein submits this Special Leave petition

under Article 136 of the Constitution of India seeking Special
Leave to Appeal against the Judgment and Final order dated
10.04.2015 passed in C.R.R. 3498 of 2014 by the Ld. Single
Judge of the Honble High Court at Calcutta.

1A.

That the impugned order having been passed by the Honble

High Court in its criminal revisional jurisdiction, Appellate
side under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, no Letters
Patent Appeal or Writ Appeal lies before the Division Bench
of Honble High Court.

2.

OUESTIONS OF LAW:

The following questions of law arise in the present Special

Leave Petition:
A.

Whether the Petitioner has any other source of income,

except the maintenance provided by the Opposite party?

B.

Whether the Opposite Party has neglected and refused to

maintain the Petitioner?

C.

Whether the Opposite Party has sufficient means to

provide maintenance?

D.

Whether the Petitioner is entitled for enhanced amount of

maintenance from the Opposite Party, to extend of half of
his salary?

E.

Whether the Petitioner is entitled for maintenance from

the date of application or from the date of order?

3.

F.

Whether the Hon'ble High Court was justified in partly

allowing the criminal revisional application of the
petitioner and affirming the order of the Ld. Trial Court
dated 10.04.2015, whereby the maintenance payable
from the date of order?

G.

Whether the Petitioner is entitle to the relief claimed for?

H.

Whether the impugned order leads to an anomalous

situation as regards the stand for the Petitioner to spend
rest of her life?

DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 3(2) :

The petitioner states that no other petition seeking special
leave to appeal has been filed against the Judgment and
Final order dated 10.04.2015 passed in C.R.R. No. 3498 of
2014 by the Ld. Single Judge of the Honble High Court at
Calcutta.

4.

DECLARATION IN TERMS OF RULE 5:

The annexures P-1 to P-

produced along with the Special

Leave Petition are true copies of the pleadings/documents

which formed part of the records of the case in the Courts
below.

5.

GROUNDS:
The instant Special Leave to Appeal is sought for by the
petitioner herein inter-alia on the following amongst other
grounds:

I.

For that the Hon'ble High Court failed to appreciate that

the Petitioner is living her life in meager position having
no source of income and not allowing maintenance from
the date of application had caused great hardship which
left her in serious debt crisis.

J.

For that the Hon'ble High Court failed to appreciate that

no reason were recorded in the impugned order of the
Trial Court dated 20.08.2014 whereby and where under
Trial Court came to the opinion that it was imperative to
direct payment of maintenance from the date of passing
the order.

K.

For that the Hon'ble High Court failed to appreciate the

fact that Learned 2nd J.M. Court has failed to appreciate
the