Case Note & Summary
The present criminal revision application was filed by Pranav Naik (the applicant) challenging an order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Children's Court for the State of Goa at Panaji in Special Case No.74 of 2020. By the impugned order, the trial court had directed the applicant to pay maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The applicant contended that the order was passed ex-parte without any notice or opportunity of hearing being afforded to him. He argued that he was not served with any summons or notice in the proceedings and that the trial court had proceeded ex-parte without ensuring proper service. The State of Goa and the Police Inspector, Porvorim Police Station, were the respondents. The High Court examined the record and found that the trial court had indeed passed the order without giving any opportunity of hearing to the applicant. The court noted that an order under Section 125 CrPC, which imposes a financial liability, cannot be passed without affording the opposite party a fair chance to be heard. The High Court held that the impugned order was not sustainable in law and was liable to be set aside. Consequently, the revision application was allowed, the order dated 08.09.2021 was quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded back to the trial court for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties. The court directed the trial court to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, without being influenced by the earlier order.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Section 125 CrPC - Ex-parte Order - The applicant challenged an ex-parte order directing him to pay maintenance under Section 125 CrPC on the ground that he was not served with notice and was not heard before the order was passed. The High Court held that the order was passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the applicant, and thus, it is not sustainable in law. The order was set aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial court for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties. (Paras 1-5) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Service of Summons - Section 125 CrPC - The court observed that the trial court had proceeded ex-parte without ensuring proper service of summons on the applicant. The High Court emphasized that an order under Section 125 CrPC cannot be passed without affording the opposite party an opportunity of being heard. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Children's Court for the State of Goa at Panaji in Special Case No.74 of 2020, directing the applicant to pay maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, is sustainable in law when the applicant was not served with notice and was not heard before the order was passed.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the criminal revision application, set aside the order dated 08.09.2021 passed by the learned Special Judge, Children's Court for the State of Goa at Panaji in Special Case No.74 of 2020, and remanded the matter back to the trial court for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to both parties. The trial court was directed to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law, without being influenced by the earlier order.
Law Points
- Ex-parte order
- maintenance
- Section 125 CrPC
- notice
- service of summons
- setting aside ex-parte order
- sufficient cause
- opportunity of hearing
