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

1996 Supreme(P&H) 218

PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
V.S.Aggarwal, J.
Annu Bala (Minor)
Versus
Dharam Pal
Criminal Revision No. 447 of 1995,
Decided On : FEBRUARY 5, 1996

Step-children are not entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Headnote:

Maintenance - Step-Children - Interpretation of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

Fact of the Case:

Kamlesh Rani, remarried the respondent after the death of her first husband and filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance of her three children from the first marriage.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that step-children are not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Issues: Entitlement of step-children to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Ratio Decidendi: The legislative stress in Section 125 is on 'his wife, his legitimate or illegitimate child, or his father or mother', indicating that it includes only the person who procreates, begets, or brings forth offspring.

Final Decision: The petition was dismissed as the step-children were found not to be entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Judgment

V.S.Aggarwal, J.

1. Kamlesh Rani was earlier married to one Bhupinder Pal son of Murari Lal. Petitioners Ami Bala and Master Gulshan Kumar were born out of their wedlock. Bhupinder Pal died on 27.12.1988. Kamalesh Rani remarried the respondent on 27.5.1989. They were blessed with another child Master Yogesh Kumar. On behalf of the three children Kamlesh Rani being their next friend and guardian filed the petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the respondent. The learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patiala on 4.8.1994 awarded maintenance to each of the child at Rs. 300/- p.m. A revision petition was preferred with the Court of Sessions. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala on 22.2.1995 allowed the revision and held that the petitioners namely Ms. Anu Bala and Master Gulshan Kumar are not entitled to maintenance from the respondent. It was held that being the step-children they have no right to claim the maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

2. Aggrieved by the said order, the present revision has been filed. The short question that comes up for consideration is as to if the petitioners who are not children of the respondent, are entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure from the respondent.

3. Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been enacted to provide maintenance for destitute wives, parents and children who are not able to maintain themselves. This is to ameliorate their condition. Sub-section (1) of Section 125, Cr.P.C. reads :

"125(1)-If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain- (a) his wife, unable to maintain herself, or

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

(c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (nor 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, or

(d) his father of mother, unable to maintain herself

, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such persPh960188on to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate nor exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole, 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 husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means." Since maintenance is being claimed under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it goes without saying that case of the petitioners must fall within the four corners of the said provisions. Reference to Hindu Marriage Act or to Hindu Adoption Act, 1966, therefore, will not be appropriate particularly when there is no ambiguity in the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. Perusal of the relevant provisions referred to above reveal that legislative stress is on his wife, his legitimate or illegitimate child or his father or mother. When the stress is on the word his, it obviously means that it would include only the person who procreates, begets or brings forth offspring. It will not include a child of another father or mother of another person. Very near to the facts of the present case is the Division Bench decision of this Court in Criminal Misc. No. 18502-M or 1994, decided on 6.7.1995. The Division Bench was concerned as to if the step-mother who is not the mother of the person, is entitled to claim maintenance or not. The answer was given in the negative and the Division Bench observed as under :

"The Legislature has specifically mentioned the word "his father" or "mother" in Clause (d) of t


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