The Calcutta High Court directed Indian pacer Mohammed Shami to pay his estranged spouse, Hasin Jahan, and daughter a month-to-month alimony of ₹4 lakh as upkeep throughout the ongoing authorized battle together with his partner.
Jahan had moved the High Court in opposition to a district classes court docket’s order directing the cricketer to pay ₹50,000 to his spouse and ₹80,000 to her daughter in 2023.
“In my considered opinion, a sum of ₹1,50,000 per month to the petitioner No. 1 (wife) and ₹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 order handed by Justice Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee on Tuesday said.
“However as regards petitioner’s child the husband or opposite party No. 2 will always be at liberty to voluntarily assist her with educational and/or other reasonable expenses, over and above the aforesaid amount,” the order added.
Domestic violence allegations
Jahan had lodged an FIR on the Jadavpur police station in opposition to Shami and his household in March 2018, 4 years after their marriage in April 2014, alleging “enormous physical and mental torture” beneath Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violation (PWDV) Act, 2005 and “sustained indifference and neglect” of her minor daughter.
Besides home violence, she additionally accused Shami of dowry harassment and match-fixing whereas alleging that Shami had stopped shouldering monetary accountability for operating her household bills.
Monetary aid
She had prayed for financial aid, together with an interim financial aid of ₹7 lakh per month for herself and a further ₹3 lakh for her daughter.
The Justice of the Peace, whereas disposing of her software, had initially rejected her prayer for financial aid and directed the pacer a month-to-month fee of ₹80,000 in the direction of his minor daughter.
On attraction, the order was later modified, directing Shami to a month-to-month fee of ₹50,000 to his spouse and ₹80,000 to his daughter.
“In view of materials placed before me and considering the elements for the determination of the quantum of maintenance as held in the salutary judgments, I am of the view that the quantum of interim monetary relief as fixed by the court below requires revision,” the excessive court docket order said.
“The opposite party/husband’s income, financial disclosure and earnings established that he is in a position to pay a higher amount. The petitioner’s wife, who has remained unmarried and is living independently with the child, is entitled to a levelled maintenance that she enjoyed during her continuance of marriage and which reasonably secures her future as well as the future of the child,” it went on to add.
