Order

1. This Misc. Petition under Section 528 of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioner, assailing the order dated 05.03.2026 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No.51/2025, whereby the learned Magistrate, in the course of proceedings initiated by Respondent No. 2, sentenced the petitioner to a term of imprisonment for a period of five months for non-payment of maintenance.

2. The factual matrix leading to the present petition is as follows:

a. The Respondent No.2, herein the wife of the petitioner, filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. before the learned ACJM, Arnod, seeking maintenance for herself and her child, alleging that she had been subjected to cruelty by her in-laws, and on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demands, she was forcibly driven out of her matrimonial home. She sought sustenance through the provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C., which entitles a spouse to maintenance.

b. On 17.01.2025, the learned trial court passed an ex-parte order directing the petitioner to pay maintenance to the respondent at the rate of ₹25,000 per month. The petitioner, being unaware of the order, challenged it before the Sessions Court on the grounds of it being passed ex-parte, and the appeal is presently pending before the Sessions Court.

c. Despite the legal proceedings and challenges, the petitioner failed to comply with the order to pay the maintenance amount. Consequently, on 05.03.2026, the learned trial court sentenced the petitioner to five months of imprisonment for willfully neglecting to pay the maintenance amount for a period of five months, thereby rendering the petitioner liable for imprisonment under Section 125(3) of the Cr.P.C. hence the instant Misc.Petition.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner fails to pay the maintenance amount due to financial constraints, which were beyond his control. The petitioner further submits that he is now willing to make a payment of ₹15,000 immediately and proposes to settle the remaining outstanding amount in six equal installments. In light of this, the petitioner humbly prays that the order of the learned Magistrate sentencing him to imprisonment be set aside, and a more equitable and just resolution be arrived at.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the order impugned and other material made available to this Court.

5. Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it is evident that the petitioner has faced financial difficulty in meeting the maintenance obligations. While it is undeniable that the failure to comply with the order of maintenance has caused hardship to the respondent, the objective of maintenance is not merely punitive but to provide sustenance to the wife and child in cases of genuine distress. The petitioner has expressed readiness to make the requisite payment, and a reasonable approach would be to allow him an opportunity to comply with the order in a manner that ensures fairness to both parties. It is observed by the Court that :

a. The petitioner has made a sincere offer to pay ₹15,000 immediately, with the balance to be cleared in six installments.

b. The petitioner’s failure to comply with the order is not due to wilful neglect, but rather due to financial incapacity, which is a factor that must be weighed in determining the appropriateness of punitive measures.

c. While the learned trial court had the discretion to impose a sentence, it is imperative to consider the principles of justice, equity, and the welfare of the child. The petitioner’s willingness to settle the arrears and the overall circumstances of the case warrant a reconsideration of the punishment imposed.

6. In view of the above, it is just and appropriate to modify the order of the learned ACJM, Arnod, dated 05.03.2026, and to provide the petitioner with a reasonable opportunity to disc