JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

2. By means of instant criminal revision, the revisionist has assailed the order dated 25.4.2022, passed by Additional Principal Judge, Family Court No.3, Kanpur Nagar, in Maintenance Case No.12 of 2017, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., whereby the application for maintenance moved by the revisionist, who is daughter of opposite party No.2 has been dismissed on the ground that she was not entitled to seek maintenance from her father after attaining age of majority, as under the provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C., only minor children of a person are entitled to seek maintenance whether married or not.

3. The factual matrix of the case in brief which led to filing present revision are that the marriage of the revisionist’s mother and father was solemnized on 21.4.1994 and two children were born out of their wedlock, out of whom the applicant/revisionist is elder one. She was born on 13.9.1995 and her younger sibling born on 1.9.2000. The relations between the parents of the applicant got strained and father of the applicant filed a Divorce Petition No.65 of 2011, before Principal Judge, Family court, Kanpur Nagar and consequently, a decree of divorce dated 12.7.2016 followed. The Family Court also granted a lump-sum amount of Rs.5 lacs as maintenance to the mother of the applicant. The applicant was initially residing with her father/opposite party No.2. After filing of divorce petitioner, her father expelled her from his home on 31.12.2010 at the age of 15 years and since then, she is residing alone alongwith her mother. The applicant is completely dependant on her mother for food, clothing, shelter, education and other expenses also. Therefore, she filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance before the court below on 8.12.2016 at the age of 21, as she intended to receive higher education and also for bearing expenses of her marriage. During pendency of proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., before the family court, the applicant had moved an application under Section 125(c) Cr.P.C. for interim maintenance, in which a meagre amount of interim maintenance of Rs.2,000/-per month was paid to the applicant, which was not in consonance with the financial needs of the applicant. The respondent No.2, in his belatedly filed written statement, has stated that he has already paid Rs.5 lacs as lump-sum amount towards the maintenance, which is part of decree of divorce. The applicant has filed rejoinder affidavit before the court below, in which she filed receipt of educational fees which show that her mother has been bearing her educational expenses and she is not having enough resources to meet out educational and other expenses of the applicant. However, the family Court without going into the merits of the case, dismissed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in limine by impugned order dated 25.4.2022 on impression that as the applicant had already attained age of majority, she is not entitled to seek maintenance from her father/the respondent No.2 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and she has to seek maintenance under Section 20 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, as appropriate remedy available to her. While giving this finding, the Court placed reliance on a judgement of Apex Court in Dr. Jagdish Jugtawat vs Smt. Manjulata And Ors, (2002) 5 SCC 424.

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that from the joint reading of two judgments of Hon’ble Apex Court in Noorsaba Khatoon v. Mohammad Quasim, AIR 1997 SC 3282 and Nanak Chand vs. Chandra Kishore Agrawal, AIR 1970 SC 446, it is apparent that Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a summary remedy of secular character and provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, which is part of personal law, does not repel nor affect the beneficial provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C., which are applicable to every citizen in the count