S.125 CrPC Meant For Immediate Support, Courts Cannot Be Hyper Technical In Their Approach: Bombay High Court

The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court while deciding a writ petition related to maintenance said that courts should not get too technical while deciding petitions under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. "The said provision is made for the immediate support that too financial in nature of a person so that he or she can survive", the court stated. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi was dealing with a petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging order of the lower court dismissing the petitioner's maintenance application. In July 2014, the petitioner filed an application before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Shevgaon, District Ahmednagar seeking maintenance from his son (respondent). He claimed that he had no source of income and was unable to work due to old age. His application was allowed and son was directed to pay five thousand rupees per month. The son filed a revision petition and the Additional Session Judge dismissed the original application. The father filed the current petition challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner claimed that he has no source of income and cannot work due to his old age. The respondent claimed that the petitioner sold his agricultural land for 750000 rupees although it has been shown less in the sale deed. Further he claimed that his father has vices which have caused difference between his parents and they are not residing together. The son has alleged that his father is demanding money just to fulfill his vices. The court examined the facts and observed that the revisional court dismissed the application on a technical basis that the petitioner received some amount in the from the sale and his so-called admission that by doing labour work he is getting wages of Rs.20/- per day. However, the question is whether there is a source of income sufficient for the father to sustain. The court stated that the revisional court could at most reduce the maintenance amount but not discard the maintenance order entirely. The son has the responsibility to maintain his father and he cannot impose the condition that the father stay with him to pay maintenance. "The approach taken by the revisional Court appears to be too hyper technical and when it comes to petitions under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., the Courts cannot be so hyper technical in their approach" the court observed. The court set aside the order of the revisional court and granted a reduced amount of maintenance of three thousand rupees per month to the father. Case no. – Criminal Writ Petition No.1312 of 2019 Case Title – Jagannath Bhagnath Bedke v. Haribhau Jagannath BedkeCitation - 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 262 Coram – Justice Vibha Kankanwadi Click Here To Read/Download Order

S.125 CrPC Meant For Immediate Support, Courts Cannot Be Hyper Technical In Their Approach: Bombay High Court

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags