A magistrate cannot award maintenance to a major married daughter under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Kainthla, J.

The petitioners have filed the present petition against the order dated 15.02.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge -II, Solan, District Solan vide which the revision filed by the petitioners (the applicants before the learned Trial Court) against the order dated 24.07.2018, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasauli, District Solan (H.P.) (learned trial Court) was dismissed. (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience).

2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are that the applicants filed an application before the learned Trial Court under Section 125 of Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) for seeking maintenance. It was asserted that the applicants are the daughters of the respondent. Applicant No.1 was aged 19 years and applicant No.2 was aged 14 years. They have no source of income to maintain themselves. The respondent being their father is legally and morally bound to maintain them. Applicant No.1 was a student of BA second year in Degree College at Kalka. She required about Rs.three thousand per month for transportation, books, clothes etc., Rs.four thousand for her food and daily needs and Rs.one thousand for her miscellaneous expenses. Applicant No.2 was a student of 10^th standard. She required a minimum amount of Rs.three thousand for her school fees, notebooks and other materials, Rs.four thousand for her food and Rs.one thousand for her miscellaneous expenses. The respondent was running a business of cosmetic. He was also working for Sahara India and his monthly income was more than Rs.forty thousand. He could easily pay Rs.Eleven thousand per month to the applicants as maintenance. Hence, the application.

3. The application was opposed by filing a reply taking preliminary objections regarding lack of maintainability and the applicants having concealed the material facts from the Court. The contents of the application were denied on merits. However, the relationship between the parties was not disputed. It was asserted that the applicants’ mother was working as a Teacher at Parwanoo Public Senior Secondary School, Sector 5, Parwanoo. She was drawing a salary of Rs.ten thousand per month. She was also receiving the rent of the building known as Santosh Bhawan to the tune of Rs.twenty-five thousand per month. The respondent was working as an agent with Sahara India which was in dispute with its investors and the respondent was not earning anything. It was specifically denied that he was earning Rs.forty thousand per month and was in a position to pay Rs.Eleven thousand per month as maintenance to the applicants. Hence, it was prayed that the present application be dismissed.

4. A rejoinder denying the contents of the reply and afÏrming those of the application was filed.

5. The parties were called upon to produce the evidence and the applicants examined their mother- Dev Lata (PW1). The respondent examined himself (RW1) and Neeraj Kumar (RW2).

6. Learned Trial Court held that a major child is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr. P.C. Therefore, no maintenance could be awarded to applicant No.1. The applicants’ mother was earning Rs.Seven thousand per month by working as a teacher. She was also receiving the rent from Santosh Bhawan. However, this will not absolve the respondent from maintaining the applicant No.2. Hence, she was held entitled to maintenance of Rs.Six thousand per month from the date of the order.

7. Being aggrieved from the order passed by the learned Trial Court, the applicants filed a revision which was decided by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan, District Solan. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Solan held that applicant No.1 was not entitled to any maintenance because she had attained majority. An interim maintenance of Rs.Five thousand was awarded to applicant No.2 which was increased to Rs.Six thousand