Adultery-finding in maintenance proceeding u/s.125 of crpc can be used in subsequent Divorce proceeding
The respondent in her deposition in the maintenance proceeding admitted about the endorsement that the said letters were discovered from her trunk. Such fact was also deposed by her in the maintenance proceeding and that is evident from Ext. 5. It appears that not only learned Magistrate in the proceeding underSection 125, Cr. P.C. but also this Court while in session of the Criminal Revisions have rejected the claim of maintenance of the respondent on the ground of proof of adultery. That finding in the proceeding under Section 125, Cr. P.C. unless rebutted by strong evidence always goes against the respondent. That aspect was not at all considered Or visualised by learned Subordinate Judge. The letters Exts. 1, 2 and 3 as noted earlier spokes of s*xual relationship and that proves the factum of adultery in this case between the respondent and Kulamani Misra. In the case of Banchhanidhi Das v. Kamala Devi, (1980) 50 Cut LT 173 : (AIR 1980 Orissa 171) involving similar facts and circumstances in a matrimonial dispute it is held that if the language in the letter is suggestive of adulterous conduct then the requirement under Section 13 of the Act is satisfied. From the facts and evidence on record, this Court finds that adulterous conduct of the respondent is proved from the evidence adduced by the appellant and that has not been rebutted by the respondent.
Orissa High Court
Narayan Rath vs Smt. Kuntala Kumari Rath on 2 November, 2004
Equivalent citations: AIR 2005 Ori 49
