SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
E.S. Venkataramiah and R.B. Misra, JJ.
Savitri - Petitioner
versus
Govind Singh Rawat - Respondent
S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 1028 of 1984
Decided on 9.10.1985

IMPORTANT POINT
The power of the Magistrate to grant interim maintenance to an applicant under section 125 Criminal Procedure Code should be implied, even though no express provision has been made for it in order to achieve the objective of the maintenance provision.

Headnote:(i) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 125 - Plea for interim maintenance by wife - No express power to award same in code - Whether the power should be implied? (Yes) (Para 6)

       (ii) Interpretation of Statutes - Maxim Ubi aliquid conceditur, conceditur et id sine quo res ipse esse non potest-When what is authorised in law is impossible to do except by doing that for which no express provision is made in the statute-The same should be implied. (Para 6)

       

JUDGMENT

Venkataramiah, J. - The short question which arises for consideration in this case is whether a Magistrate before whom an application is made under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') can make an interim order directing the person against whom the application is made under that section to pay reasonable main tenancy to the applicant concerned pending disposal of the application.

2. In the instant case, the petitioner was an applicant under section 125 of the Code before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi. In her application, she prayed for an order against her husband directing him to pay maintenance to her. Immediately after she filed the said application, she made another application before the Magistrate for an interim order directing her husband to pay some reasonable sum by way of maintenance pending disposal of the main application. The learned Magistrate declined to make such an interim order on the ground that there was no express provision in the Code enabling a Magistrate to pass such an order. Aggrieved by the said order the applicant has filed this special leave petition under Article 136 of the Constitution.

3. It is true that there is no express provision in the Code which authorises a Magistrate to make an interim order directing payment of maintenance pending disposal of an application for maintenance. The Code does not also expressly prohibit the making of such an order. The question is whether such a power can be implied to be vested in a Magistrate having regard to the nature of the proceedings under section 125 and other cognate provisions found in Chapter IX of the Code which is entitled "Order For Maintenance of Wives, Children and Parents" Section 125 of the Code confers power on a Magistrate of the first class to direct a person having sufficient means but who neglects or refuses to maintain (i) his wife, unable to maintain herself or (ii) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or (iii) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has a! wined majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself or (iv) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, to pay a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, as the case may be, at such monthly - rate not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole as such Magistrate thinks fit. Such allowance shall be payable from the date of the order, or, If so ordered from the date of the application fur maintenance. Section 126 of the Code prescribes the procedure for the disposal of an application made under section 25. Section 127 of the Code provides for alteration of the rate of maintenance in the light of the changed circumstances or an order or decree of a competent civil court. Section 128 of the Code deals with the enforcement of the order of maintenance. It is not necessary to refer to the other details contained in the above said provisions.

4. A reading of the above provisions shows that they are intended to provide for a preventive remedy for securing payment of maintenance which can be granted quickly and in deserving cases with effect from the date of the application itself. The rate of maintenance that can be awarded is also limited even though under the law governing the parties a competent civil court may order payment of a larger sum by way of maintenance in appropriate cases. The civil courts have inherent power to grant interim maintenance pending disposal of the suit for maintenance. The point for consideration is whether the Magistrate can also make such an interim order or not.

5. The jurisdiction of a Magistrate under Chapter IX of the Code is not strictly a criminal jurisdiction. While passing an order under that Chapter asking a person to pay maintenan

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top