Father has a lasting duty to maintain children even post-majority if they cannot support themselves, echoing moral principles alongside statutory mandates.

JUDGMENT :

AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE, J.

1. Challenging the legality and impropriety of the order dated 27th July, 2022 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 3rd Court Hooghly, in connection with M. Ex. Case No. 132 of 2016 (arising out of MC case no. 167/2002) the petitioner has preferred the instant application.

2. Petitioners counsel Mr. Sen submits that the marriage between the petitioner and the opposite party was solemnised on 02.05.1995 and they are blessed with a female child namely Araika Singh who was born on 20th April, 1997. Petitioners further case is that thereafter she was subjected to physical and mental torture and was driven out from the house of the opposite party herein in the month of May 2000 and her further allegation is opposite party wilfully refused to maintain both the petitioner and her minor daughter Araika Singh and for which she initiated aforesaid proceeding being MC case no. 167 of 2002.

3. Learned Trial Magistrate by an order dated 26th April,. 2004 directed the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs. 1500/- for the petitioner and Rs. 1500/- for the minor daughter totalling a sum of Rs. 3,000/- per month w.e.f. date of filing of the maintenance application i.e. 19.09.2002.

4. Being aggrieved by the said order, the opposite party herein filed a Revisional Application being Criminal Motion no. 110 of 2004 and the Revisional Court disposed of the said Criminal Motion no. 110 of 2004 by reducing the maintenance amount for the daughter to the extent of Rs. 1200/- per month and directed the opposite party to continue to pay such revised maintenance amount w.e.f. 26th April, 2004.

5. Thereafter the petitioner herein filed an application under section 127 of the Code of criminal Procedure for enhancement of the quantum of maintenance which gave rise to Misc. Case no. 2 of 2009. The Trial Court by an order dated 25th August, 2025 disposed of the said Misc. Case no. 2 of 2009, directing the opposite party herein to pay a sum of Rs. 2,500/- each per month to the petitioner and her the then minor daughter Araika Singh from the date of the passing of the said order i.e. 25.08.2015. The said order dated 25.08.2015 was assailed before the Revisional Court who by a judgment and order dated 10.03.2016 was pleased to enhance the quantum of maintenance to Rs. 7,000/- per month for each of the petitioner and for her the then minor daughter and the order of enhancement was given effect from the date of filing of the petition under section 127 of the Code.

6. Thereafter the opposite party herein filed a Revisional Application before this High Court challenging the legality and validity of the said order dated 10th March, 2016 passed by the Revisional Court but said Revisional Application stood dismissed as not pressed by an order dated 3rd December, 2019. Thereafter the petitioner herein filed application under section 128 of the Cr.P.C vide instant MC Execution Case no. 132 of 2016 so as to put the arrear amount in execution calculating on and from 31.03.2009 to 28.02.2015 in terms of the order dated 10.03.2016 which is still pending for final adjudication, claiming interalia for realization of total arrear amount of maintenance to the tune of Rs. 8,23,600/- in respect of the petitioner and her daughter and in connection with the execution case time to time the opposite party herein paid altogether a sum of Rs. 4,92,500/- against the total arrear amount of Rs. 8,23,600/-

7. However on 24.08.2022 the opposite party herein filed an application before the executing court praying interalia for refund/adjustment of the purported excess amount paid and