Calcutta High Court Orders Cricketer Mohammad Shami To Pay ₹4 Lakh Per Month As Maintenance For Estranged Wife & Daughter

The Calcutta High Court has asked Indian cricketer Mohammad Shami to pay his estranged wife and daughter Rs 4 lakh per month as maintenance in his ongoing legal tussle against Hasin Jahan, his estranged wife.Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee held: "...Interim monetary relief as fixed by the Court below requires revision. The opposite party/husband's income, financial disclosure and earnings established that he is in a position to pay a higher amount. The petitioner wife who has remained un-married and is living independently with the child is entitled to a levelled maintenance that she enjoyed during her continuance of marriage and which reasonably secure her future as well as future of the child. In my considered opinion a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- per month to the petitioner no.1(wife) and Rs. 2,50,000/- to her daughter would be just fair and reasonable to ensure financial stability for both the petitioners, till disposal of the main application."The petitioner-wife got married to the opposite party no.2 (husband) on 7th April, 2014, following the Islamic Rituals and customs and after the said marriage, the couple was blessed with a female child, who was born on 17.07.2015. The allegation levelled by the petitioner against her husband/opposite party no.2 in her application under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violation Act, 2005 (in short PWDV Act) is that after marriage the petitioner and her minor daughter were subjected to enormous physical as well as mental torture at the instance of the opposite party no.2 and his family members and for which under very compelling circumstances, the petitioner had to lodge a written complaint which was treated as an FIR and Jadavpur P.S. Case no. 82 of 2018 dated 8th March, 2018 under section 498A/328/307/376/325/34 of the Indian Penal code was registered for investigation, against the opposite party no.2 herein and his other family members. Her further contention is that being aggrieved by the continuous mental and physical torture, indifference, neglect meted out upon the petitioner and her minor daughter, she was constrained to file the instant application under section 12 of the PWDV Act interalia praying for monetary relief including an interim monetary relief to the tune of Rs. 7 (seven) lakhs per month for herself and monetary relief to the tune of Rs. 3 (three) lakhs for her minor daughter from the opposite party no.2.The Magistrate, while disposing of such application filed by the petitioner under section 23 of the PWDV Act, rejected the prayer for interim monetary relief qua the petitioner and only directed her minor daughter to pay a sum of Rs. 80,000/- per month towards interim monetary relief.In appeal, the aforesaid order was modified and the opposite party no.2 was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- per month to the petitioner/wife and further directed the opposite party no.2/daughter to pay a sum of Rs. 80,000/- towards interim monetary relief from the date of filing the interim application.Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that while passing the impugned order, the learned Court below put unnecessary reliance upon the written objection filed by the opposite party No. 2 and treated the same as gospel truth.It was noted that for the year 2020-21 the opposite party's income was more than Rs 7 crores, but mechanically granted interim relief to the tune of Rs. 50,0000/- per month to the petitioner and Rs. 80,000/- to her minor child and did not consider that from the affidavit of assets and liabilities filed by the petitioner.Court noted that the amount given by the petitioner's husband was meagre since the wife/s monthly expenses are over ₹6 lakh.Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party argued that the petitioner is the divorced wife of the opposite party no.2, who has suppressed various material facts and tried to mislead the court. She has not disclosed that on the self-same cause of action, she had filed another application under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, being 'ACM 398 of 2018' before the self-same Judicial Magistrate, wherein she had also filed an affidavit of assets and liabilities.It was further argued that by an order dated 3rd October, 2023, the Magistrate directed the petitioner herein to file documents disclosing the aforesaid facts but the petitioner through her advocate informed the court on 16th January, 2024 that she shall not file the document as directed by the court and as such learned Magistrate directed that adverse presumption shall be drawn against the petitioner at the time of consideration of interim maintenance for non-disclosure of relevant documents. He further contended that a bare perusal of the affidavit of assets filed by the petitioner in the proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. and the proceeding under PWDV Act, would reflect gross contradiction which shows that the petitioner has made false statements in the affidavit of assets, for which also she is not...

Calcutta High Court Orders Cricketer Mohammad Shami To Pay ₹4 Lakh Per Month As Maintenance For Estranged Wife & Daughter

Srinjoy Das

Tags