Jahanvi Agarwal
The High Court of Karnataka has issued a historic decision that clarifies the meaning and application of Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), which deals with the maintenance of spouses, children, and parents.
The case included a petition brought under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. challenging a decision and order rendered by the Dharwad Family Court that denied the petitioner’s request for maintenance.
The case facts are that the petitioner and respondent got married on November 23, 2009. Under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., the petitioners and their lawyer sought maintenance from the respondent, invoking neglect and refusal to provide maintenance.
However, the Family Court denied the petitioners’ claim in a decision dated November 14, 2018, citing a number of grounds, including the lack of proof of purposeful neglect and the absence of evidence indicating the petitioner’s willingness to live with the respondent in the marital residence.
Upon review, the High Court made pertinent observations. The court highlighted that:
“It is clear from a plain reading of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. that a person is entitled to initiate proceedings if they demonstrate any of the aspects stipulated therein, i.e., neglects or refusal to maintain.”
The Court highlighted the summary nature of proceedings under Section 125 and its emphasis on providing the petitioner with immediate relief.
The Court’s analysis also covered the scope of the proceedings, highlighting the fact that the clause does not compel the court to look into any claims or denials that would have caused the parties to part ways.
The court stated that:
“The reasons for the petitioners not to be living along with the respondent cannot be adjudicated in the present proceedings and a finding to be recorded regarding the same.”
In addition, the High Court questioned the lower court’s conclusion that the petitioner had willingly left the respondent and had not proven the latter’s deliberate negligence.
The court noted, “An order passed in an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. does not finally determine the rights and obligations of the parties,” and emphasized that the statute provides a summary remedy for maintenance.
In light of all of these considerations, the High Court granted the petition, overturned the Family Court’s decision, and instructed the Family Court to continue its proceedings in line with the law. The petitioners were also instructed to appear before the Family Court on August 16, 2023.
Case Name: Renuka v. Sri Venkatesh
Diary Number: 100033/2020
Bench: Justice C.M. Poonacha