Pratima Das @ Arati Das vs Subudh Das
- SCC(2018) 4 SCC 528
- Neutral2018 INSC 85
- AIRAIR 2018 SC Supp 1208
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where paternity of children claimed to be born to a woman is disputed in proceedings for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C., DNA evidence establishing that the alleged father is the biological father of the children constitutes proof that the woman is the wife of that man and entitles her to maintenance, notwithstanding a High Court's earlier finding that she had failed to prove her status as wife.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 213 OF 2018 [@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 7877 OF 2014]
PRATIMA DAS @ ARATI DAS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SUBUDH DAS Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
KURIAN, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant approached this Court aggrieved by
the Judgment dated 27.05.2014 passed by the High
Court of Gauhati in Criminal Revision Petition No.
396 of 2013. The order in favour of the appellant
under Section 125 Cr.P.C. granting maintenance at the
rate of Rs.4000/- per month from the month of
September, 2013, has been set aside, mainly on the
ground that the appellant failed to prove that she
was the wife of respondent – Subudh Das. According
to the appellant, the respondent had fathered three
children in her though the same was denied by the
respondent.
Signature Not Verified
3. Hence, by order dated 28.02.2017, we directed the Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2018.02.09 16:45:18 IST Reason:
parties to go for a DNA test. The report of the DNA
has been forwarded to us. It is reported that the 2
respondent is the father of the three children born
to the appellant.
4. In the above circumstances, we set aside the
impugned order passed by the High Court and restore
the order dated 04.09.2013 passed by the
Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Hojai, Sankardev
Nagar in M.R. Case no. 99 of 2008 filed under Section
125 Cr.P.C.
5. The arrears as on today shall be paid within a
period of four months from today.
6. In view of the above, this appeal is disposed of.
.......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]
.......................J. [ MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR ]
New Delhi;
February 01, 2018.
3
ITEM NO.9 COURT NO.5 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 7877 of 2014
PRATIMA DAS @ ARATI DAS Appellant(s)
VERSUS
SUBUDH DAS Respondent(s)
Date : 01-02-2018 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
For Appellant(s) Mr. Azim H. Laskar, Adv.
Mr. Sachin Das, Adv.
Mr. Amitabha Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Aditya K. Archiya, Adv.
Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, AOR
For Respondent(s) Mr. Manish Goswami, Adv.
Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of in terms of the signed
non-reportable Judgment.
Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (RENU DIWAN) COURT MASTER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed non-reportable Judgment is placed on the file)
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free