Back
PANKAJ MITHAL, SANDEEP MEHTA
Akanksha Arora – Appellant
Versus
Tanay Maben – Respondent
ORDER
1. Service of notice upon the respondent is complete, but no one has entered appearance on his behalf.
2. Leave granted.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.
4. The appellant by means of this appeal is assailing the judgment and order dated 21.09.2023 passed by the High Court of Jabalpur in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No.18481 of 2022 titled as 'Akanksha Arora vs. Tanay Maben.
5. It appears that the Principal Judge, Family Court vide order dated 08.03.2022 in exercise of powers under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'the CrPC') had fixed interim maintenance in favour of the appellant.
6. Being dissatisfied with the quantum of interim maintenance, the appellantwife had filed a petition under Section 482 CrPC in the High Court seeking enhancement. The said petition has been dismissed by the High Court by the order impugned on the ground that it is not maintainable as the appellantwife has a remedy of a revision under Section 397 CrPC.
7. This Court has, in a catena of decisions, provided that nomenclature of a petition is immaterial and for doing substantive justice, the High Court can always convert a petition under Section 482 CrPC to a
Availability of alternative remedy of criminal revision under Section 397 Cr.P.C, by itself, cannot be a good ground to dismiss application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Nomenclature of a petition is i....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an order of maintenance affects the right of a person drastically and substantially, hence, it cannot be treated as an interlocutory order and....
AN ORDER PASSED UNDER SECTION 451 CR.P.C. IS NOT AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER AND IT DOES NOT ATTRACT THE BAR UNDER SECTION 397(2) CR.P.C. AND REVISION UNDER SECTION 397(1) CR.P.C. IS MAINTAINABLE.
The main legal point established is that revision lies against the order of conviction affirmed in appeal, and settlement of dispute by way of compromise does not warrant the exercise of inherent jur....
The High Court's inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to prevent abuse of process, and these powers operate concurrently with Article 227 of the Constitution.
When an order under challenge is not interlocutory in nature and is amenable to the revisional jurisdiction, then inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could not be exercised.
High Courts can exercise inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to prevent injustice, even if alternate remedies are available.
The order of the Sessions Judge passed under Section 397 Cr.P.C. on an application made by any person is final in relation to such person and cannot be interfered with by the High Court in the exerci....
A magistrate cannot award maintenance to a major married daughter under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
