Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 63 (CHH)

Devendra Baghel S/o Parasram Baghel v. Sindhu Baghel W/o Devendra Kumar Baghel

2024-01-18

PARTH PRATEEM SAHU

body2024
ORDER : 1. This revision is filed challenging the order dated 29.08.2023 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Rajnandgaon in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 77/2021 whereby learned Family Court has allowed the application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. filed by non-applicant/wife and awarded maintenance of Rs.10,000/- per month in her favour from the date of application and further ordered that amount of maintenance already paid would be adjustable. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that though the applicant has raised multiple grounds in this criminal revision, however, this revision is being pressed only on the ground that learned Family Court erred in awarding the amount of maintenance from the date of application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. instead from the date of order. He submits that the application is filed on 23.03.2021 whereas the final order was passed on 29.08.2023 and, therefore, the delay in passing the final order cannot be attributed to the applicant. The applicant will suffer adversely if he is directed to pay arrears of the amount in lump-sum. In alternate, learned counsel for the applicant also submits that if this Court comes to the conclusion that amount of maintenance can be awarded from the date of application then the applicant may be granted suitable time to pay arrears of the amount of maintenance in installments. 3. Learned counsel for the non-applicant opposes the submission of learned counsel for the applicant and would submit that learned Court below has passed the impugned order awarding maintenance from the date of application as the non-applicant has filed an application for maintenance for the reason that she was not having any source of income to maintain herself on the date of filing of application. Therefore, learned Family Court has not committed any error in passing the impugned order. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and also perused the documents annexed along with this revision petition. 5. Short question is raised by learned counsel for the applicant in this petition as to whether learned Family Court can award the amount of maintenance from the date of filing of application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. or not. 6. Maintenance is claimed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. Relevant portion of the provision under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is extracted below for ready reference: “125. 6. Maintenance is claimed under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. Relevant portion of the provision under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. is extracted below for ready reference: “125. Order for maintenance of wives, children and parents: (1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain: (a) his wife, unable to maintain herself. (b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself. (c) his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself. (d) his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate [***] as such Magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct: Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means. xxx xxx xxx (2) Any such allowance for the maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses for proceeding shall be payable from the date of the order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application for maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be.” 7. Sub-Section (2) of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. provides for grant of maintenance or interim maintenance from the date of order, or, if so ordered, from the date of the application. The provision of law itself provides jurisdiction to the learned Family Court to pass the order granting maintenance from the date of application. 8. According to the facts of the case, marriage of the parties was solemnized on 24.06.2019 and within short time of marriage, non-applicant/wife was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment. The provision of law itself provides jurisdiction to the learned Family Court to pass the order granting maintenance from the date of application. 8. According to the facts of the case, marriage of the parties was solemnized on 24.06.2019 and within short time of marriage, non-applicant/wife was subjected to ill-treatment and harassment. As pleaded in the application, against the ill-treatment and harassment, non-applicant/wife has also lodged report to the concerned police station, based upon which, crime for the offence under Section 498-A/34 of the IPC was registered and there was further pleading that the non-applicant is not having any source of income and she is in need of money for the essential requirement of food, clothe, etc. From the pleading made in the application, it is apparent that on the date of filing of the application itself, non-applicant/wife was not having any source of income and is in need of amount towards maintenance for procuring essential requirement of food and clothe along with other things. 9. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Badshah vs. Urmila Badshah Godse and Another, (2014) 1 SCC 188 while interpreting the provision of Section 125 of Cr.P.C. held thus: “13.3.....purposive interpretation needs to be given to the provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. While dealing with the application of a destitute wife or hapless children or parents under this provision, the Court is dealing with the marginalised sections of the society. The purpose is to achieve “social justice” which is the constitutional vision, enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. The Preamble to the Constitution of India clearly signals that we have chosen the democratic path under the rule of law to achieve the goal of securing for all its citizens, justice, liberty, equality and fraternity. It specifically highlights achieving their social justice. Therefore, it becomes the bounden duty of the courts to advance the cause of the social justice. While giving interpretation to a particular provision, the court is supposed to bridge the gap between the law and society.” 10. Issue with regard to award of maintenance from the date of application was considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 . While giving interpretation to a particular provision, the court is supposed to bridge the gap between the law and society.” 10. Issue with regard to award of maintenance from the date of application was considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 . Hon'ble Supreme Court taking note of its earlier decision as also decisions of various High Courts concluded that right to claim maintenance must date back to the date of filing the application, since the period during which the maintenance proceedings remained pending is not within the control of the applicant and observed thus: “113. It has therefore become necessary to issue directions to bring about uniformity and consistency in the Orders passed by all Courts, by directing that maintenance be awarded from the date on which the application was made before the concerned Court. The right to claim maintenance must date back to the date of filing the application, since the period during which the maintenance proceedings remained pending is not within the control of the applicant.” 11. In view of the law enunciated by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned decisions and considering the fact of the case which led to non-applicant/wife to file application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. I do not find any force in the ground raised by learned counsel for the applicant, accordingly, it is repelled. 12. The revision petition being devoid of substance, is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed. However, considering the fact that the applicant herein is a Govt. servant and posted as Pharmacist. If he is required to pay arrears of the amount of maintenance due to him in one stroke, it may cause inconvenience to him as well as to his family members, therefore, I find it appropriate to direct that applicant shall pay arrears of amount of maintenance in four installments. He will pay the regular monthly amount of maintenance awarded by learned Family Court by impugned order.