Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
An application was filed by the mother of the appellant Abhilasha on behalf of her and her two brothers under Section 125 CrPC against her father Mr. Prakash for claiming maintenance which was later on dismissed by the Additional Session Judge.
Against this order, an appeal was made for the criminal revision of the said judgment by Additional Session Judge in High Court under Section 498 CrPC. However, it was held by the High Court that children are entitled to maintenance in case of a minority only and after attaining majority, the maintenance can be done only because of any physical or mental abnormality or any injury which made them unable to maintain themselves.
Aggrieved from the order passed by the High Court an appeal was filed by the appellant‘Abhilasha’ who is the daughter of the respondent Mr. Prakash in the Supreme Court in this case ‘Abhilasha v. Prakash &Ors’.
It was contented by the counsel on behalf of the Appellant that though she had attained majority since she is unmarried, she has all rights to claim maintenance from her father. There was an error committed by the High Court in excusing the application filed by the Appellant under Section 482 CrPC on the wrong premise that after attaining majority and not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality, she is not entitled to any maintenance.
It was submitted that under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, there is an obligation on a person to maintain his daughter if she is unmarried. Additionally, the appellant is still unemployed which made her vulnerable for claiming maintenance.
It was further presented by the Counsel that when the application was filed by the applicant, she was minor at that time which made her fall under Section 125 CrPC to claim maintenance, and hence, the Revisional Court allowed the maintenance till she attained the age of majority.
Contrary to the submissions made by the Appellant, it was submitted by the counsel on behalf of respondent Mr. Prakash that under Section 125 CrPC “Entitlement to claim maintenance by a daughter, who has attained majority is confined to cases where the person because of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain herself”.
Therefore, the interconnected question arose in consideration of the appeal made by the appellant that whether she can claim maintenance from her father under Section 125 CrPC although she had attained majority and is still unmarried and not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or injury and the respective orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate and Revisional Court limiting the claim of the appellant can be side aside or not?
Observations of the Court:
The court is of the view that it is correct that under Section 125 of CrPC maintenance to a major daughter can only be granted when she is suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or any fatal injury in which she was unable to maintain herself irrespective of the fact she is married or unmarried.
It However, was observed by the Court that the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 was "enacted to amend and codify the law relating to adoptions and maintenance among Hindus." Now, the court has to see if the applicant is not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or injury which is mentioned under Section 125 CrPC, then by Section 20 of Act, 1956, she is entitled to claim maintenance till she is unmarried or not.
The Court rightly observed that the term ‘wife’ in Section 125 of CrPC has been given a wider and extended meaning and it includes not only a wedded wife but also a woman married by the performance of necessary rites or following the procedure laid down by personal law(Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, 1985 Cri LJ 875).
Here also personal law was looked to find out whether wife and unmarried daughter is maintainable or not. The maintenance of wife is applicable under Section 125 CrPC and the right of a minor girl for maintenance from parents after attaining the majority till her marriage is recognized under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956(Jagdish Jugtawat v. Manju Lata and Others, (2002) 5 SCC 422).
Section 20(3) of the 1956 Act is a recognition of principles of Hindu Law regarding the maintenance of children and aged parents. It makes it a statutory obligation of a Hindu to maintain his or her daughter, who is unmarried and unable to maintain herself out of her earnings or other property.
The maintenance contemplated under Section 20 of the 1956 Act is a larger and broader concept whereas maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is a narrow concept because it just provides immediate relief to the applicant.
Therefore, no exception can be taken to the judgment passed by the Family Court which is based on a combined reading of Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 because Family Courts have the jurisdiction exercisable by a Magistrate of First Class Under Chapter IX of CrPC relating to ordering for maintenance of wife, children, and parents.
Hence, the submissions made by the appellant that as an unmarried Hindu daughter she can claim maintenance from her father till she is married and unable to maintain herself, relying on Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 was accepted by the court.
86540
103860
630
114
59824