BAHADUR ALI BABUBHAI CHARANIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Kanabar for the petitioner and Mr.H.L.Jani, learned APP for the respondent State of Gujarat. Brief facts of the present petition are as under:

(2.) Learned advocate Mr. Kanabar appearing for the petitioner has contended that the respondent No.2 is a daughter of the petitioner who has attained the majority on 19th December, 1997 and, therefore, she is not entitled to claim the maintenance as per the order passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amreli. Date of birth has also been mentioned which is dated 18th December, 1979. It is also not the case of the petitioner that the respondent No.2 daughter has married so far.Before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amreli, it was the contention of the petitioner that once the daughter has attained the majority on 19th December, 1997, under section 125(1) (b)(c), she is not entitled to maintenance from the father. This contention was negatived by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, relying upon relevant provisions of section 125(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by directing the petitioner to pay the amount of maintenance even after the date on which the respondent No.2 attained majority. Learned advocate Mr. Kanabar has fairly submitted that before the revisional court, advocate appearing for the respondent No.2 has fairly admitted that the relevant provisions of section 125(1) (c) of the COde are not applicable and, therefore, it is the duty of the Court to consider relevant provisions of section 125 (1) (b) of the Code and, therefore, both the Courts below have committed error and therefore, the orders passed by both the Courts below are required to be quashed and set aside. In support of his contentions, he has relied upon the decision of the apex court reported in AIR 1979 SC 381 and has pointed out that there was no restriction in the old Code of Criminal Procedure but because of the new section, there is change and, therefore, daughter or the son, after attaining the majority, are not entitled to maintenance from the father. This change has been considered and discussed by the apex court in the aforesaid decision. Learned advocate Mr. Kanabar has read the relevant portion from the aforesaid decision of the apex court. I have considered the same. Learned advocate Mr. Kanabar has also contended that the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against the orders passed by the sessions court in revision. According to him, this Court is having discretion to entertain the petition in case the Court is satisfied that there was miscarriage of justice.

(3.) The above observations made by the apex court in the aforesaid decision would make it very much clear in respect of the female child that the female child is entitled to claim maintenance from the father if the father is having sufficient means to pay the same upto the date of marriage which is considered by the apex court. In this case, it is and it was not the case of the petitioner that he is not having sufficient means to maintain his wife and children. In view of these facts, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amreli cannot be said to have erred in granting maintenance allowance in favour of the respondent No.2 daughter with effect from 13th December, 1998 which has ultimately been confirmed by the sessions court in re vision preferred by the petitioner husband. The learned sessions judge while rejecting the revision preferred by the petitioner has referred to the aforesaid decision of the apex court reported in AIR 1997 SC page 3280. It is not the case of the petitioner that his daughter has married and, therefore, she is not entitled to claim maintenance from him. It is also not the case of the petitioner that respondent No.2, daughter is able to maintain herself. When the Court asked the question to Mr. Kanabar that if it is held that the daughter who is residing with the divorced wife and who has attained majority is not entitled to claim maintenance from her father, then, who else is responsible to maintain her, Mr. Kanabar has not been able to answer the said question. Even otherwise, female child, after her getting married, would become the responsibility of her husband and prior to her marriage, the father will be the person responsible for her maintenance.