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

2024 Supreme(Chh) 9

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU, J.
Devendra Baghel S/o Parasram Baghel – Petitioner
Versus
Sindhu Baghel W/o Devendra Kumar Baghel – Respondent
CRR No. 1095 of 2023
Decided On : 18-01-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Parag Kotecha.
For the Respondent: P.K. Patel.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. must date back to the date of filing the application, as per the interpretation established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

Headnote:

Maintenance - Award of Maintenance from Date of Application - Section 125 of Cr.P.C. - [Section 125 of Cr.P.C.] - The court discussed the interpretation of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and the right to claim maintenance from the date of filing the application, as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Badshah vs. Urmila Badshah Godse and Another and Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another. The court concluded that the right to claim maintenance must date back to the date of filing the application, considering the period during which the maintenance proceedings remained pending is not within the control of the applicant.

Fact of the Case:

The revision petition challenges the order of the Family Court, which awarded maintenance to the non-applicant/wife from the date of application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. The applicant contends that the maintenance should have been awarded from the date of the order, citing the delay in passing the final order. The non-applicant opposes this, stating that she filed the application due to lack of income at the time of filing.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the right to claim maintenance must date back to the date of filing the application, as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in relevant cases. It repelled the ground raised by the applicant and dismissed the revision petition, directing the applicant to pay arrears of maintenance in installments.

Issues: The main issue was whether the Family Court erred in awarding maintenance from the date of application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. instead of from the date of the order.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the interpretation of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. as established by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which mandates the right to claim maintenance from the date of filing the application, considering the period during which the maintenance proceedings remained pending is not within the control of the applicant.

Final Decision: The revision petition was dismissed, and the applicant was directed to pay arrears of maintenance in installments.

ORDER :

1. This revision is filed challenging the order dated 29.08.2023 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 77/2021 whereby learned Family Court has allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by non-applicant/wife and awarded maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month in her favour from the date of application and further ordered that amount of maintenance already paid would be adjustable.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that though the applicant has raised multiple grounds in this criminal revision, however, this revision is being pressed only on the ground that learned Family Court erred in awarding the amount of maintenance from the date of application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. instead from the date of order. He submits that the application is filed on 23.03.2021 whereas the final order was passed on 29.08.2023 and, therefore, the delay in passing the final order cannot be attributed to the applicant. The applicant will suffer adversely if he is directed to pay arrears of the amount in lump-sum. In alternate, learned counsel for the applicant also submits that if this Court comes to the conclusion that amount of maintenance can be awarded from the date of application then the applicant may be granted suitable time to pay arrears of the amount of maintenance in installments.

3. Learned counsel for the non-applicant opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that learned Court below has passed the impugned order awarding maintenance from the date of application as the non-applicant has filed an application for maintenance for the reason that she was not having any source of income to maintain herself on the date of filing of application. Therefore, learned Family Court has not committed any error in passing the impugned order.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed along with this revision petition.

5. Short question is raised by learned counsel for the applicant in this petition as to whether learned Family Court can award the amount of maintenance from the date of filing of application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. or not.

6. Maintenance is claimed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. Relevant portion of the provision under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is extracted below for ready reference:

    “125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents:

(1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain:

(a) his wife, unable to maintain herself.

(b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself.

(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself.

(d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate [***] as such Magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct:

Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means.

xxx xxx xxx

(2) Any such allowance for the maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be payable from the date of the order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be.”

7. Sub-Section (2) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. provides for grant of maintenance or interim maintenance from the date of order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application. The provis

      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