Right to Maintenance Under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
The right to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) is a crucial provision aimed at providing financial support to certain categories of individuals who are unable to maintain themselves. This section is a part of the social justice legislation and is designed to prevent vagrancy and destitution by compelling those who have the means to support their dependents. This article explores the scope, applicability, and judicial interpretation of Section 125 CrPC.
Scope and Applicability
Section 125 CrPC provides a legal remedy for maintenance to:
1. Wives (including divorced wives who have not remarried)
2. Children (legitimate or illegitimate, minor or major if unable to maintain due to physical or mental abnormality/injury)
3. Parents (father or mother, unable to maintain themselves)
Key Provisions
1. Entitlement to Maintenance:
- If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain:
- His wife, unable to maintain herself
- His legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself
- His legitimate or illegitimate child (major), who is by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself
- His father or mother, unable to maintain themselves
2. Quantum of Maintenance:
- The amount of maintenance should be reasonable and just, considering the needs of the claimant and the income of the person liable to pay. It should not exceed ₹500 per month as per the original text, but this limit has been subjected to revisions and judicial interpretations to allow higher amounts based on the circumstances.
3. Procedure:
- An application for maintenance can be filed in the district where the claimant resides or where the respondent resides.
- The Magistrate, after considering the evidence, can order the person liable to pay monthly maintenance.
4. Interim Maintenance:
- The Magistrate can order interim maintenance during the pendency of the application.
5. Enforcement:
- If a person fails to comply with the maintenance order without sufficient cause, the Magistrate can issue a warrant for levying the amount due and may also sentence the defaulter to imprisonment for up to one month for each month’s default.
Judicial Interpretation and Key Case Laws
The judiciary has played a pivotal role in interpreting and expanding the scope of Section 125 to ensure justice and equity. Some significant case laws include:
1. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985):
- Citation: AIR 1985 SC 945
- This landmark judgment held that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, overriding personal law to prevent destitution. The judgment emphasized that Section 125 is a secular provision and is applicable to all citizens irrespective of their religion.
2. Dinanath v. State of Maharashtra (2007):
- Citation: (2008) 1 SCC 800
- The Supreme Court held that the term “wife” includes a woman who has been divorced or who obtains a divorce and has not remarried. The decision reinforced that maintenance is a means of social justice.
3. Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena (2014):
- Citation: (2015) 6 SCC 353
- The Court observed that the purpose of Section 125 CrPC is to ensure that the neglected wife, children, and parents are not left in penury. It highlighted the need for speedy disposal of maintenance applications and directed that interim maintenance should be granted without undue delay.
4. Nagendrappa Natikar v. Neelamma (2013):
- Citation: (2014) 14 SCC 452
- The Supreme Court ruled that the maintenance granted under Section 125 CrPC cannot be restricted or negated by any agreement between the husband and wife. The statutory right to maintenance cannot be waived off by private contracts.
5. Chanmuniya v. Virendra Kumar Singh Kushwaha (2010):
- Citation: (2011) 1 SCC 141
- The Court expanded the definition of “wife” to include women in live-in relationships akin to marriage, ensuring they are not deprived of maintenance under Section 125.
Conclusion
Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, is a vital provision for the protection and welfare of wives, children, and parents who are unable to maintain themselves. It embodies the spirit of social justice, ensuring that those who are financially capable fulfill their moral and legal obligations to support their dependents. Through progressive judicial interpretations, the courts have reinforced and expanded the scope of this provision, making it an effective tool against destitution and vagrancy.