In a significant case the stance taken by the Uttar Pradesh government's lawyer in a case involving a plea for maintenance by a Muslim woman and her daughter has left the Supreme Court perplexed. 

The woman had sought maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code for herself and her minor daughter. The surprising element in this case was the opposition mounted by the state's lawyer, representing the husband's interests.

Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjwal Bhuyan expressed their astonishment at the unusual turn of events, stating that it was indeed strange for the government's lawyer to advocate for the husband in a matter of maintenance. 

The bench emphasized that the primary role of the government's lawyer is to function as an officer of the court and assist in arriving at a correct and just conclusion. The court underscored that such a responsibility should be prioritized over any particular client's interests.

In response to this peculiar situation, the bench directed that the order will be forwarded to the secretaries of the Home and Law Departments of Uttar Pradesh. However, the court clarified that it was not intending to label the lawyers representing the state as guilty or subject them to punishment for their representation in the case.

The legal saga began with the Family Court granting the appellant's application on March 20, 2021, providing maintenance of Rs. 12,000 per month. Subsequently, the appellant and her husband filed a review petition. However, the High Court, in a surprising move, reduced the maintenance to Rs. 2,000 per month in interim maintenance on August 26, 2021, without affording the appellant woman an opportunity to present her case.