MANSI VOHRA Vs. RAMESH VOHRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr. P.C. challenging the order dated 17th March, 2012 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge ('ASJ') in Criminal Revision Petition No. 147 of 2011 wherein it was held that the petition filed by a major unmarried daughter for maintenance was not maintainable under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The ASJ in the impugned order dated 17th March, 2012 has held as under:-

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was not maintainable, the petitioner still had a statutory right to get maintenance from the respondent under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. In this connection, he relies upon a judgment of the Supreme Court in Jagdish Jugtawat v. Manju Lata, (2002) 5 SCC 422 wherein it has been held as under:-

(3.) SINCE the issue pertains to interpretation of Section 125 Cr.P.C. and Section 20(3) of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, this Court is of the view that it is essential to reproduce the relevant portion of the said Sections. The relevant portion of the aforesaid Sections are reproduced hereinbelow:-