Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

Preventing Vagrancy and Destitution: Madras High Court Upholds Maintenance for Divorcee’s Children Under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has reaffirmed the essence of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), emphasizing its role in preventing vagrancy and destitution. The court, presided over by the Honorable Mr. Justice K.K. Ramakrishnan, dismissed a criminal revision petition (Crl.RC(MD)No.611 of 2023) filed by R. Ochap pan against an order granting maintenance to his children.

The petitioner, Ochappan, had challenged the maintenance awarded to his daughter, Keerthana, and his minor son. The original maintenance petition was filed by Keerthana, seeking support for herself and her brother following her parents’ divorce. The trial court initially dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, questioning Keerthana’s standing as a natural guardian for her brother. However, the decision was later overturned by a revisional court, granting monthly maintenance of Rs. 7,500 and Rs. 5,000 to Keerthana and her brother, respectively.

In his judgment, Justice Ramakrishnan highlighted the role of Section 125 Cr.P.C. as a social welfare tool, aimed at ensuring social justice to women, children, and destitute parents. “The object is to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It provides a speedy remedy for the supply of food, clothing, and shelter to the deserted wife,” the court observed, citing various Supreme Court decisions to reinforce its interpretation.

The High Court upheld the revisional court’s decision, stating that there was no legal impediment for Keerthana to file the maintenance petition on behalf of her minor brother. The court rejected the petitioner’s argument regarding his salary constraints and emphasized the current cost of living in determining the maintenance amount.

This judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding social welfare laws and providing relief to those in distress, particularly in cases involving maintenance for children after divorce. The court’s decision is a significant step towards ensuring that children of separated parents are not left in a state of financial vulnerability.

Date of Decision: 09.01.2024

R.Ochappan VS Keerthana

 

Latest Legal News