IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.
D.Vijayakumar - Petitioner
Versus
B.Kalaivani – Respondent
Crl.O.P.Nos.3287, 3289 & 3291 of 2026
Decided On : 11-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. family court's continuing jurisdiction under section 125 cr.p.c. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 2. court's recognition of family court's errors. (Para 8) |
| 3. final orders on petitions and directions for future proceedings. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
ORDER :
A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.
These criminal original petitions have been filed seeking to quash the return docket orders, all dated 30.12.2025 passed in M.P.SR.Nos.3489, NIL and 3488 of 2025 respectively in M.C.No.596 of 2022, on the file of the III Additional Family Court, Chennai.
2. Since no order adverse to the interest of the respondents is passed, notice to the respondents in all these petitions is dispensed with.
3. The brief facts are as follows:
3.1 The 1st and 2nd respondents herein are none other than the wife and son of the petitioner and the 1st respondent on her behalf and on behalf of her minor son/the 2nd respondent herein, filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., seeking to direct the petitioner herein to pay a sum of Rs.35,000/- per month towards maintenance in their favour, by suppressing the fact that 1st respondent has been working as a Teacher in Everwin Matriculation school since 2022 and earning a sum of Rs.9,990/- and that the 2nd respondent/son has been studying in the very same school where the 1st respondent is working and his school fees has been waived under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.
3.2 The III Additional Principal Family Court, Chennai, without considering any of the above said facts, vide order dated 14.06.2024, directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- per month towards maintenance in favour of the 1st respondent/wife and Rs.15,000/- per month towards maintenance in favour of the 2nd respondent/son. Subsequently, the 1st respondent on her behalf and on behalf of the minor son, the 2nd respondent herein, filed petitions under Section 125 (3) of Cr.P.C. in Crl.MP.No.870 of 2025 and NIL of 2025 in M.C.No.596 of 2022 respectively, seeking to direct the petitioner to pay the arrears of maintenance and to continue to pay the monthly maintenance awarded by the Family Court.
3.3 Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 127 of Cr.P.C in M.P.SR.No.3489 of 2025 seeking to recall the order dated 14.06.2024 and petitions under Order XVI Rule 6 r/w. 151 of CPC in M.P.SR.No. NIL of 2025 and M.P.SR.No.3488 of 2025, seeking to issue subpoena to the Everwin Matriculation Higher Secondary School represented by its Principal to produce the service records of the 1st respondent and the particulars of the students covered under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 and to issue subpoena to the Branch Manager, State Bank of India, Ambattur, Chennai to produce the Bank Statement of the 1st respondent bearing Account No.30074622230, respectively. However, the Family Court, vide docket orders, all dated 30.12.2025, returned the above petitions with the following endorsements:-
“M.P.SR.No.3489 of 2025 :
Sec 127 Cr.P.C. is for only modification or change of circumstances. This petition is appeal against the order of this Court which should be filed only to the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. Hence, this petition is not maintainable."
M.P.SR.No . of 2025 :
Since main petition under Section 127 Cr.P.C returned. Hence this petition also returned.
M.P.SR.No.3488 of 2025 :
Since main petition under Section 127 of Cr.P.C returned, this petition also returned.”
3.4 Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come up with these petitions.
4.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the 1st respondent/wife obtained the above said maintenance order by suppressing several material facts and upon coming to know about the same, the petitioner filed the above petitions to show that the 1st respondent is continuously employed and earning a sum of Rs.9,990/- and that the 2nd respondent/son was admitted to school under the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory
A magistrate has the authority to modify or cancel maintenance orders under Section 125 and 127 of the Cr.P.C. based on changed circumstances, as clarified by the Supreme Court.
The court established that the provisions of Sections 125, 126, and 127 Cr.P.C. allow for the recall and modification of maintenance orders, and that Section 362 Cr.P.C. does not impose a bar on such....
The Family Court has jurisdiction to decide cases under both Section 125 of Cr.P.C. and Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, and can grant maintenance to an unmarried major dau....
The court established that applications for maintenance under the D.V. Act must be properly categorized, and the Magistrate has the authority to modify maintenance orders based on changed circumstanc....
Section 125 Cr.P.C. mandates maintenance for wives and children, emphasizing social justice and the husband's obligation to provide financial support.
Maintenance – Section 125, Cr.P.C. is a measure of social justice and is specially enacted to protect women and children.
Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C should be awarded from the date of the application, and evidence is essential to substantiate income claims.
Proceeding under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. therefore should precede a proceeding under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C.
Children have a statutory and moral obligation to maintain their elderly parents, which cannot be dismissed due to personal financial difficulties.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.