Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sk. Chand, filed a Criminal Writ Petition before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, challenging the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Akola, dated 31.8.2009, which had dismissed his revision against an order of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Akola, dated 30.4.2009. The Magistrate had enhanced the maintenance payable to the petitioner's daughter, respondent no.1, from Rs.250/- per month to Rs.1500/- per month under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The dispute had a long history since 1992, when the daughter and her mother had first applied for maintenance. In 1995, the Sessions Judge had directed the petitioner to pay Rs.250/- per month to the mother and Rs.250/- per month to the daughter. The daughter later sought enhancement, claiming that the petitioner's income had increased. The Magistrate allowed the enhancement, and the Sessions Judge upheld it. The petitioner argued that the daughter was an able-bodied adult and could maintain herself, and that there was no change in circumstances to justify enhancement. The High Court allowed the petition, setting aside the impugned orders. The court held that for enhancement under Section 127 CrPC, the applicant must prove a change in circumstances, which the daughter failed to do. Additionally, the court noted that the daughter was 18 years old, a student, and able-bodied, and thus not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC as she could maintain herself. The court also found the enhanced quantum of Rs.1500/- per month to be excessive and not justified. The petition was allowed, and the rule was made absolute.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Enhancement under Section 127 CrPC - Change in Circumstances - The court held that for enhancement of maintenance under Section 127 CrPC, the applicant must prove a change in circumstances such as increased income of the opposite party or increased needs of the claimant. In this case, the daughter failed to prove any change in circumstances since the original order of 1995. (Paras 4-6) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Adult Daughter - Entitlement - Section 125 CrPC - The court held that an adult daughter who is able to maintain herself is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The daughter was 18 years old, a student, and able-bodied, and thus not entitled to maintenance. (Paras 5-6) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Maintenance - Quantum - Reasonableness - Section 125 CrPC - The court held that the quantum of maintenance must be just and reasonable. The enhancement from Rs.250/- to Rs.1500/- per month was excessive and not justified on the facts. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the enhancement of maintenance from Rs.250/- to Rs.1500/- per month to the daughter was justified under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether the daughter was entitled to maintenance despite being an able-bodied adult.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 31.8.2009 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Akola in Criminal Revision Application No.133 of 2009 along with Criminal Revision No.156 of 2009 and the order dated 30.4.2009 passed in Misc. Criminal Case No.763 of 2008 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Akola are set aside. Rule is made absolute.
Law Points
- Maintenance enhancement under Section 127 CrPC requires proof of change in circumstances
- Daughter's right to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is not absolute if she is able to maintain herself
- Quantum of maintenance must be just and reasonable
