The main legal point established in the judgment is the duty of courts to provide social justice by granting maintenance to destitute women and children, and the importance of interpreting maintenance provisions liberally to achieve the constitutional vision of securing justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity for all citizens.

JUDGMENT

Raj Shekhar Attri, J. (Oral) - The purpose and object of granting maintenance to destitute women and children is to provide social justice to them and to prevent vagerancy by compelling those who can support those, who are unable to support themselves. The philosophy of social justice, as engraved in our constitution, is multi facet - which demands Tightness and fairness in all the fields of life - which includes the political, the moral, religious and the social. If the women of the country are undermined then the concept of social justice will certainly erode. Hon'ble Supreme Court in Richa Mishra vs. State of Chhatisgarh (Law Finder Doc Id 740568). has observed as under:-

"It is now realised that there is a bidirectional relationship between economic development and women's empowerment defined as improving the ability of women to access the constituents of development- in particular health, education, earning opportunities, rights, and political participation. This bidirectional relationship is explained by Prof. Amartya Sen by propounding a theory that in one direction, development alone can play a major role in driving down an equality between men and women; in another direction, continuing discrimination against women can hinder development. In this scenario, empowerment can accelerate development. From whichever direction the issue is looked into, it provides justification for giving economic empowerment to women. It is, for this purpose, there is much emphasis on women empowerment (as it leads to economic development) by United Nations World Bank and other such Bodies. Interestingly, the 2012 World Development Report (World Bank 2011) adopts a much more nuanced message. While it emphasizes the "business case" for women empowerment, it mainly takes it as given that the equality between women and men is a desirable goal in itself, and policies should aim to achieve that goal. Poverty and lack of opportunity breed inequality between men and women, so that when economic development reduces poverty, the condition of women improves on two counts: first, when poverty is reduced, the condition of everyone, including women, improves, and second, gender inequality declines as poverty declines, so the condition of women improves more than that of men with development. Economic development, however, is not enough to bring about complete equality between men and women. Policy action is still necessary toachieve equality between genders. Such policy action would be unambiguously justified if empowerment of women also stimulates further development, starting a virtuous cycle. Empowerment of women, thus, is perceived as equipping them to be economically independent, self-reliant, with positive esteem to enable them to face any situation and they should be able to participate in the development activities."

2. In both these revision petitions, the parties i.e. Sh. Ashok-(husband) and Smt. Rekha (wife) have challenged the order dated 17.04.2017, passed by the District Judge, Family Court-II, Faridabad vide which Master Bhupen, minor son of Smt. Rekha and Ashok, was awarded Rs.10,000/- per month from the date of order. However, the application for maintenance of Smt. Rekha-wife was dismissed.

3. Sh. Ashok (husband) has preferred CRR (F)-236-2017 for setting aside the maintenance awarded to his son whereas Smt. Rekha (wife) has come up with revision i.e. CRR (F)-285-2017 for grant of maintenance to her.

4. Admittedly, the marriage of Smt. Rekha and Ashok was solemnized on 25.02.2009. From their wedlock, minor son Bhupen was born.

5. Smt. Rekha preferred an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance allowance asserting that she was treated with cruelty; she and her son were neglected and refused to maintain by her husband. She has further submitted that her husband is employed in Haryana police. Apart from it, he has an agriculture land and he can easily pay Rs. 25,000/- as maintenance to her.

6. The application