Recently, the Uttarakhand High Court held that the father is not solely responsible for the maintenance of the child. Both the parents are liable under Section 125 CrPC. 

In the said matter, the single hedaed bench of Justice Pankaj Purohit was dealing with the revision challenging the judgment of the Family Court whereby the petition made by the minor son of the revisionist for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was allowed partly and the revisionist (mother of respondent-minor) was directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,000/- as maintenance to the respondent-minor from the date of filing of the petition for maintenance till the respondent-minor attained majority.   

In this case, the mariage was dissolved, due to their differences. After the dissolution of the marriage, the respondent-minor son was living with his father-Nathu Lal. 

After divorce, the mother never visited the respondent-minor son, which deprived him the love and affection of his mother. The financial condition of his father deteriorated and he had no means to provide quality education, upbringing and food to the respondent-minor. 

According to the son, it is the duty of the mother also along with father to maintain her child. It was further pleaded that as against the financial condition of his father, revisionist-mother was a Government Teacher and was getting at the time of filing of the petition for maintenance about Rs.25,000 to Rs.30,000/- per month as she was posted in primary school Ramnagar.

On the basis of the aforesaid averments, the respondent prayed Rs.10,000/- from her mother (revisionist). 

The bench while dealing with this matter looked into Section 125 (1) Cr.P.C. and noted that the provisions of the Section make it clear that the liability to maintain a minor child is always on “any person”, if he has sufficient means neglects and refuses to maintain a minor child and such “person” is directed to give the monthly allowance as maintenance at the rate deemed fit to the Magistrate.

''It is clear from the aforesaid sub-Section (2) of Section 126 Cr.P.C. that there is no such word “father” or “husband” in the aforesaid sub-section, as it was there in the old Cr.P.C. Section 488 sub-Section (6). Now, in place of “father” or “husband”, “person” has been incorporated and it is provided that “all evidence to such proceedings shall be taken in the presence of the person against whom an order for payment of maintenance is proposed to be made……….” , said the Court.

''The provisions of Section 125 Cr.P.C. have already been changed, as discussed above and according to the language of the present Section 125 Cr.P.C., in the opinion of this Court “person” would include both male and female and in reference to a minor child whether legitimate or illegitimate mother or father having sufficient means if neglects and refuses to maintain such minor child would be held liable to pay the maintenance of such child. ''

Case Title: Smt. Anshu Gupta v. Adwait Anand @ Devansh