ABHILASHA Vs. PARKASH AND OTHERS
LAWS(SC)-2020-9-19
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: PUNJAB & HARYANA)
Decided on September 15,2020

ABHILASHA Appellant
VERSUS
Parkash And Others Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

SMITA MAHENDRA HALARNKAR VS. MAHENDRA TUKARAM HALARNKAR [LAWS(BOM)-2021-8-60] [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL GANI BHAT VS. AFROZA [LAWS(J&K)-2021-4-19] [REFERRED TO]
SANGEETA VS. BAPU [LAWS(KAR)-2022-7-1402] [REFERRED TO]
MEENAKSHI VS. SHIVAPPA [LAWS(KAR)-2022-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
MENTI TRINADHA VENKATA RAMANA VS. MENTI LAKSHMI, VIZIANAGARAM DISTRICT [LAWS(APH)-2021-9-9] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. - (1.)Leave granted.
(2.)This appeal has been filed by the appellant, daughter of respondent Nos. 1 and 2, challenging the order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 16.08.2018 by which order the High Court dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the appellant praying for setting aside the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rewari dated 16.02.2011 as well as the order dated 17.02.2014 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari.
(3.)The brief facts necessary to be noticed for deciding this appeal are:-
3.1 The respondent No.2, mother of the appellant, on her behalf, as well as on behalf of her two sons and the appellant daughter, filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband, the respondent No.1, Parkash, claiming maintenance for herself and her three children. The learned Judicial Magistrate vide its judgment dated 16.02.2011 dismissed the application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. of the applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and allowed the same for applicant No.4 (appellant before us) for grant of maintenance till she attains majority.

3.2 Aggrieved against the judgment dated 16.02.2011, all the four applicants filed a criminal revision before the Court of Sessions Judge, which criminal revision was dismissed by learned Additional Sessions Judge by order dated 17.02.2014 with the only modification that revisionist No.4 (appellant before us) shall be entitled to maintenance till 26.04.2005 when she attains majority. Learned Additional Sessions Judge held that as per provision of Section 125 Cr.P.C, the children, who had attained majority are entitled to maintenance, if by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury, they are unable to maintain themselves. Learned Additional Sessions Judge also held that the revisionist No.4 (i.e. appellant) is not suffering from any physical, mental abnormality or injury, therefore, she is entitled to maintenance only till 26.04.2005 i.e., till she attains majority.

3.3 Challenging the order of Sessions Judge as well as the Judicial Magistrate, an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed before the High court by all the applicants including the appellant. High Court by the impugned judgment dated 16.02.2018 dismissed the application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by making following observations:-

"Both the Courts are consistent with regard to declining maintenance to petitioners No. 1 to 3. As regards grant of maintenance to Abhilasha by the trial Court, the order regarding it was modified by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari observing that she was entitled to get maintenance till attaining majority and not thereafter since she is not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or injury, in those eventualities a child, who though has attained majority but is unable to maintain itself is entitled to get maintenance.

I do not find any illegality or infirmity in the judgment passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rewari, which might have called for interference by this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Therefore, the petition stands dismissed."

3.4 This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment of the High Court.

;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.