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

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 708

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI, J
SMT. AMIA DEVI AND ORS. – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent
CRLMP / 2066 / 2014



Advocates:
Mr. Pankaj Gupta, Mr. Vikram Singh Rajpurohit, Dy.G.A., Mr. Shambhoo Singh

The court affirmed that a married daughter is not entitled to maintenance while enhancing the wife's maintenance from Rs.2,000 to Rs.3,000 per month, recognizing the need for a reasonable support amount.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 125 - Maintenance - Application for maintenance filed by wife and children - Court held that daughter had attained majority and married, thus not entitled to maintenance - Minor son entitled to maintenance until majority - Maintenance for wife enhanced from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.3,000/- per month. (Paras 1, 2.1, 3.1)

(B) Maintenance - The amount awarded must be just and reasonable, considering the circumstances of the parties involved. (Para 3.1)

Facts of the case:
The wife and her minor children challenged the orders passed by the learned Magistrate and the Sessions Judge regarding maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The Magistrate allowed maintenance for the son until majority but denied it for the daughter who had married. The Sessions Judge had initially awarded Rs.2,000/- per month to the wife.

Findings of Court:
The court approved the dismissal of maintenance for the daughter and enhanced the maintenance for the wife to Rs.3,000/- per month, acknowledging the previous amount as insufficient.

Issues: The main issues were whether the daughter was entitled to maintenance after marriage and the adequacy of the maintenance amount for the wife.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that once a daughter marries, she is not entitled to maintenance; however, the maintenance for the wife was inadequate and required enhancement to meet reasonable standards.

Result: Maintenance for the wife enhanced to Rs.3,000/- per month.

Order :

1. These instant Misc. Petitions have been preferred to made challenge to the order passed by the learned Magistrate dated 17.03.2012 passed in Criminal Misc. Case No.217/2007 and the order dated 28.05.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Judge Sirohi in Criminal Revision No.73/2012. One on behalf of the wife and her minor children and the other is on behalf of husband. It was a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C .

2. After taking on record, the pleadings, examining the wife Amiadevi, A.D.2 Pabu as well as the examining the husband and his two wives along with some documents, the learned Magistrate disposed of the application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C . with the observation that applicant No.2 Shanti had attained the majority and married to someone therefore she is not entitled to get maintenance while the applicant No.3 Mahendra, the minor son was allowed to get maintenance until he attains the age of majority.

2.1 Wife and her minor children preferred a revision petition, which was allowed by the learned Sessions Judge and directions were issued to the husband to pay a some of Rs.2,000/- per month to the wife Smt. Amiadevi while the petition filed on behalf of minor children was dismissed.

2.2. Both the parties made challenge to this Court to the orders aforesaid.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record of the case.

3.1. Indisputably, the child Shanti and Mahendra had attained the age of majority and so also that the daughter Shanti got married to someone, therefore, there remains no question of granting maintenance to them and to this extent, the order of Court of revision is approved. The wife Amiadevi who has already awarded Rs.2,000/- per month as maintenance which seems to be very paltry amount, thus the same is enhanced from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.3,000/- per months. Now the petitioner shall pay Rs.3,000/- per month to the wife-Amia Devi instead of Rs.2,000/- per month as maintenance from the date of this order.

4. With these observations, directions and modifications, the instant Misc. Petitions as well as stay petitions stand disposed of.

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