Interim maintenance is meant to prevent destitution and support dependents effectively during matrimonial disputes.

JUDGMENT :

Kirti Singh, J.

The present petition has been preferred against judgment dated 11.10.2019 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Barnala, in the proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., whereby interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month was awarded in favour of respondent No.2-minor child till she attain majority from the date of the application.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.1-wife was solemnised on 24.11.2007 according to the Sikh rites and ceremonies. Out of this wedlock, one female child namely Ishkirat Kaur was born on 09.09.2010. A matrimonial dispute ensued between the couple and the respondents filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for seeking maintenance. The petitioner filed a reply and contested the claim made by the respondents. The learned Court below vide judgment dated 11.10.2019 granted interim maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month in favour of respondent No.2-minor child till she attain majority from the date of the application. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the wife of the petitioner has left his company without any justifiable cause. Further, though the Family Court was right in observing that since respondent No.l was working and earning at par with the petitioner, she was not entitled to maintenance however, this same fact was overlooked while fixing the amount of interim maintenance to be granted in favour of respondent No.2, which is on the higher side.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the present petition and has submitted that the learned Family Court has rightly passed the judgment.

5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record with their able assistance, this Court finds no force in the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. The object and purpose behind granting interim maintenance is to ensure that the dependent spouse and children are not reduced to destitution or vagrancy on account of failure of marriage. At the same time, a just and careful balance must be struck to ensure that this provision does not degenerate into a weapon to punish the other spouse. The Courts are required to conduct the maintenance proceedings while being alive to the legislative intent behind the provision under Section 125 Cr.P.C in its true spirit, which is to provide speedy assistance and social justice to women, children and infirm parents. The provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. were enacted as a measure to further social justice and protect dependent women, children and parents, which also fall within the constitutional sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India.

7. A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Vimala (K.) v. Veeraswamy (K.) (1991) 2 SCC 375 , speaking through Justice Fatima Beevi, opined that as follows:

'3. Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is meant to achieve a social purpose. The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It provides a speedy remedy for the supply of food, clothing, and shelter to the deserted wife. '

8. A two-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Kirtikant D. Vadodaria v. State of Gujarat (1996) 4 SCC 479 , speaking through Justice Faizan Uddin, opined as follows:

'15. ... While dealing with the ambit and scope of the provision contained in Section 125 of the Code, it has to be borne in mind that the dominant and primary object is to give social justice to the woman, child and infirm parents, etc. and to prevent destitution and vagrancy by compelling those who can support those who are unable to support themselves but have a moral claim for support. The pr