Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sri Sailesh Kumar, filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, seeking to quash the order dated 11.09.2025 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dakshina Kannada, Mangalore in Crl.Misc.No.68/2023. The impugned order directed the issuance of an arrest warrant and FLW (Fieri Facias Warrant) against the petitioner. The petitioner is the husband and respondent before the Family Court, while the respondent herein is the wife and petitioner before the Family Court. The brief facts indicate that the wife had filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking maintenance. During the proceedings, the Family Court issued a bailable warrant against the husband, and subsequently, without considering his objections, passed the impugned order directing issuance of an arrest warrant and FLW. The husband challenged this order on the ground that the Family Court failed to consider his objections and that there was no proper service of notice. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the Family Court had not considered the objections filed by the husband and had not ensured proper service of notice before issuing the bailable warrant. The Court held that the impugned order was unsustainable and liable to be quashed. Consequently, the High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter back to the Family Court for fresh consideration, directing the Family Court to consider the objections of the husband and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Family Law - Maintenance Proceedings - Arrest Warrant - Section 125 CrPC - The Family Court issued an arrest warrant and FLW against the husband without considering his objections and without ensuring proper service of notice - Held that the impugned order is unsustainable and liable to be quashed (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Procedure - Service of Notice - Bailable Warrant - Principles of Natural Justice - The Family Court failed to follow the procedure under Section 125 CrPC and principles of natural justice by not considering the objections filed by the husband and by issuing a bailable warrant without proper service - Held that the order is set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Family Court was justified in issuing an arrest warrant and FLW against the husband without considering his objections and without proper service of notice
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned order dated 11.09.2025 passed in Crl.Misc.No.68/2023, and remanded the matter back to the Family Court for fresh consideration, directing the Family Court to consider the objections of the husband and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Arrest warrant cannot be issued without considering objections
- proper service of notice is mandatory before issuing bailable warrant
- Family Court must follow procedure under Section 125 CrPC and principles of natural justice
