MOHAMMED AZEEM Vs. SABEEHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved by the order dtd. 30/10/2024 passed in Crl.MC.No.45/2022 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Mangaluru whereby the Family Court had allowed the application filed by the wife and issued look out circular against the husband, the husband is before this Court.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/husband submits that the Family Court had no jurisdiction to issue the look out circular in matrimonial disputes which is contrary to the directions issued by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Sharma and others Vs. State of UP and Another, 2017 (6) Supreme 266. It is submitted that the order of the Family Court in issuing the look out circular is contrary to Sec. 125(3) and Sec. 421 of the CrPC. It is submitted that Sec. 125(3) provides that in enforcement of the maintenance order Court may issue a warrant for levying the amount due in the manner provided for fines as prescribed under Sec. 421 of Cr.P.C. Sec. 421 provides that a warrant for levy of fine by attachment of sale of immovable property. In this case, the Family Court had already taken recourse and passed an order on 5/10/2023 to recover the amount due from respondent Nos.1 to 3 by issuing the warrant of attachment and selling the property. Proviso to Sec. 421 provides that no such warrant shall be executed by arrest or detention in prison of the offender. The Family Court has no power to issue the look out circular in the process of executing the order of maintenance. It is submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 had considered that for non-payment of maintenance, enforcement order including striking of defence will have to be passed as a last resort if the Court finds default to be willful and contumacious. It is submitted that viewed from any angle, the Family Court had no jurisdiction to issue the look out circular.

(3.) This matter came up before this Court on 28/7/2025, and this Court had passed the following order: