IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRANAY VERMA th ON THE 17 OF FEBRUARY, 2024 MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 11478 of 2020 BETWEEN:-

AJAYSINGH S/O KALYANSINGH CHOUHAN, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, OCCUPATION: PRIVATE NAUKARI, R/O VILLAGE MANGLIYA, TEHSIL SANWER, DISTRICT INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....PETITIONER (BY SHRI SHAILENDRA SHRIVASTAVA - ADVOCATE)

AND KU. RUCHI D/O AJAYSINGH CHOUHAN, AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS, VILLAGE 45, DURGA CHOWK, BADNAWAR, DISTRICT DHAR (MADHYA PRADESH)

.....RESPONDENT (BY SHRI SANDEEP KOCHATTA - ADVOCATE)

This petition coming on for order this day, the court passed the following:

ORDER

With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard.

By this petition preferred under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11.02.2020 passed in Criminal Revision No.03/2019 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Badnawar, District – Dhar whereby setting aside the order dated 04.02.2019 passed in Criminal Case No.65/2014 by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Badnawar, the application preferred by the respondent for grant of maintenance to her had been allowed Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI and petitioner had been held liable for payment of maintenance to her till she gets married.

2. The facts of the case are that the respondent along with her mother Seema had filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the trial Court for award of maintenance to them from the petitioner in which an order dated 08.06.2011 was passed awarding a sum of Rs.1,000/- per month to Seema and Rs.500/- per month to the respondent by way of maintenance. Thereafter, on filing of an application under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C. registered at Criminal Case No.100/2018 the order dated 08.06.2011 was modified and the amount of maintenance awarded to Seema was enhanced to Rs.2,000/- per month and that awarded to respondent to Rs.1,000/- per month. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order the petitioner as well as respondent and Seema preferred Criminal Revisions which were disposed off by the revisional Court by awarding the respondent Rs.2,000/- per month by way of maintenance and to Seema in the sum of Rs.3,000/- per month. The amount awarded to respondent was till her attending majority.

3. Thereafter, by an order dated 24.04.2018 passed in M.Cr.C.

No.10504/2016 this Court had directed the trial Court to consider as to whether the respondent would be entitled for maintenance upon her attaining majority. By order dated 04.02.2019, the trial Court accepted the contentions of petitioner that respondent would not be entitled for maintenance upon attained majority. In revision preferred by the respondent the said order has been set aside by revisional Court holding that in terms of Section 125 (1)(c) of the Cr.P.C. the respondent is entitled for award of maintenance till her marriage even though she has attained majority.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in view of the Signature Not Verified Signed by: JYOTI express language of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., upon attaining majority, the respondent is not entitled for award of any maintenance whereas the revisional Court has erred in holding so. Reliance has been placed by him on the decision of Supreme Court in Abhilasha v. Prakash and another, AIR 2020 SC

4355.

5 . Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the petitioner has not paid the amount of maintenance to the respondent as has been directed by the Courts below from time to time hence he is in arrears of maintenance and is not entitled to maintain this petition which deserves to be dismissed on that count itself. It is further submitted that respondent is legally entitled to get maintenance from the petitioner, her father, till her marriage as per provisions of Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act which is an established position in view of which the inherent powers of this Co