Back
YOGENDRA KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Alakhram – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J.—Heard Sri Virpratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Sri Arvind Kumar, learned A.G.A., for the State-opposite party no.1.
2. The present application has been filed seeking to quash the order dated 18.11.2019 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Mahoba, as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 189 of 2019 (Smt. Uma Devi vs. Alakhram), stated to be pending before Family Court, Mahoba.
3. The aforementioned order dated 18.11.2019 has been passed upon an application (paper no. 14 kha) under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. The applicant herein claims to have filed an application dated 6.1.2020 (paper no. 17 kha) for recall of the said order and the said application is stated to be pending.
4. Learned Additional Advocate General has raised an objection with regard to the maintainability of the present application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the ground that the order dated 18.11.2019 passed by the Family Court is in exercise of powers under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. on account of default made by the applicant in complying with the earlier order dated 20.10.2016 directing
Section 125 Cr.P.C. establishes a continuing liability to pay maintenance and provides for its enforcement through Section 125(3). The provision serves a social purpose to prevent destitution and pro....
The court established that enforcement of maintenance orders under Section 125 Cr.P.C. must be pursued through Section 128 Cr.P.C., as the latter provides the appropriate legal framework for such enf....
The court emphasized the summary nature of the proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the objective to provide immediate relief to the applicant.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. must date back to the date of filing the application, as per the interpretation es....
Validity of marriage in section 125 proceedings is based on evidence, and maintenance should enable the wife to live with dignity.
Broad and expansive interpretation should be given to the term 'wife' to include even those cases where a man and woman have been living together as husband and wife for a reasonably long period of t....
The right to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. is a continuing obligation, and while coercive recovery methods are limited to one year, the entitlement to maintenance arrears is not ....
An application for maintenance filed under Chapter IX cannot be dismissed for default as there is no implicit power granted to do so under the relevant provisions.
Maintenance proceeding – Speedy trial/enquiry is fundamental rights of parties – Principle of natural justice shall be followed while adjudicating petition.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
