Any Person Can File Plea U/S 125 CrPC Seeking Maintenance On Behalf Of A Minor: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has observed that Section 125 of CrPC does not prohibit any person from filing a maintenance petition on behalf of a minor. The bench of Justice KK Ramakrishnan opined thus while holding that a married woman is not barred from filing a plea on behalf of her minor brother seeking maintenance from their father. “Section 125 of CrPC is social welfare legislation. The Section is aimed to achieve the social justice. The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. Section 125 CrPC, provides a speedy and efficacious remedy to those women, children and destitute parents who are in distress,” the Court added as it emphasized upon the objective of Section 125 CrPC. The case in brief The petitioner (Father), working as a driver with TNSTC, got separated from his first wife and re-married. From the first marriage, the respondent-girl and her brother were born, both of whom had approached the Additional Judicial Magistrate, Madurai with a plea claiming maintenance from their father (petitioner). The plea asserted that the respondent's brother is currently pursuing education, and due to a lack of adequate financial resources, she is unable to cover his educational expenses and other financial needs. In this maintenance petition, the minor was represented by his sister. The Court dismissed the maintenance petition on the ground that the brother of the respondent is a minor and the maintenance petition was filed for herself and on behalf of her minor brother claiming maintenance is not maintainable for the reason that she is not a natural guardian and next friend of her minor brother. Aggrieved over the same, the respondent filed a Revision Petition before the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Madurai, who allowed the same on the ground that though the respondent cannot seek relief under Section 125 CrPC, the trial Court is the authority to grant maintenance to the respondent under Section 20(3) of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, until she gets married. The Court further directed their father to pay Rs.7,500/- per month to the respondent girl and Rs.5,000/- per month to her brother. Aggrieved over the same, the father moved the instant revision plea before the High Court. Court's observations At the outset, the Court noted that since respondent-girl is now married, she is not entitled to claim maintenance, however, the Court underscored that her claim on behalf of minor brother would be maintainable. The Court also noted that the trial Judge had erroneously dismissed the claim on the ground that the respondent had no locus standi to file the petition for maintenance on behalf of her minor brother. Section 125 of CrPC. In this regard, the court stressed that Section 125 of CrPC, does not prohibit any person from filing a maintenance petition on behalf of the minor children. The Court referred to Apex Court's decisions in Ramesh Chander Kaushal v. Veena Kaushal 1978, Fuzlunbi v. K. Khader Vali 1980, Kirtikant D. Vadodaria vs State Of Gujarat & Anr 1996 and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan 2015. Further, the court also affirmed the decision of the revision court, which invoked the suo motu power outlined in Section 399 of the CrPC to nullify the dismissal order of the Judicial Magistrate issued against the minor boy. The Court found justification in the revision court's order to grant maintenance to the minor brother, even though only the married sister had initiated the revision against the dismissal of the maintenance claim concerning her, and no revision had been filed by the minor brother. “revisional Judge exercised the suo motu power in the interest and welfare of the minor children by exercising his parens partiae jurisdiction. This Court finds no reason to differ with the said reasoning of the learned revision Judge,” the Court observed. With this, the Court upheld the order of the Revisional Court of granting Rs.5,000/- as maintenance to the minor boy, the son of the petitioner. The criminal revision was thus, dismissed. Case Title - R. Ochappan vs. Keerthana Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Mad) 36 Click Here To Read/Download Order

Any Person Can File Plea U/S 125 CrPC Seeking Maintenance On Behalf Of A Minor: Madras High Court

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

Any Person Can File Plea U/S 125 CrPC Seeking Maintenance On Behalf Of A Minor: Madras High Court

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers