SHAIKH AHMED SHAIKH MAHOMED ASHRAF Vs. BAI FATMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application in revision against an order made by the Sessions Judge of Surat upholding the order of the Sub-divisional Magistrate directing the applicant to pay maintenance to his son and daughter under Section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The daughter is aged twenty-one, and the point, which is taken on this application, is that Section 488 is confined to minors. The section provides that if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain his wife or his legitimate or illegitimate child unable to maintain itself, an order can be made.

(2.) WE were referred by Mr. Thakor to the caste of Krishnaswami Ayyar v. Chandravadana (1913) I.L.R. 37 Mad. 565 where the learned Judge expressed the opinion that, as the word "child" has not been defined in the Criminal Procedure Code, it means in Section 488 a person who has not reached full age. A similar opinion was expressed by a learned Judge of the Calcutta High Court in Hemantakumar Banerji v. Manorama Debee (1935) I.L.R. 62 Cal. 639.

(3.) THE application, therefore, must be rejected.