DR. CHANDRASHEKHAR Vs. SAU JAYSHRI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application, the husband has challenged the issuance of warrant for the recovery of maintenance amount beyond the period of one year from the date on which it became due.

(2.) Shri Padhye, the learned Counsel appearing for the applicant, has stated that first proviso to Sub-section (3) of Sec. 125, Code Criminal Procedure provides that no warrant shall be issued for the recovery of any amount due towards maintenance beyond the period of one year from the date on which it became due. The limitation prescribed for the recovery of maintenance amount is clearly specified under the aforesaid provision. In the instant case, it is found that the wife filed an application under Sec. 128, Code Criminal Procedure claiming arrears of maintenance from 19th June, 1984 upto 18th Nov., 1985 for the amount of Rs. 7,200.00. The application was made on 7th Nov., 1985. In the meantime, on 5th Dec., 1985, the Sessions Judge stayed the proceedings of recovery of the maintenance amount. It seems that within that period, the husband deposited Rs. 1300.00 on 20th June, 1987 and Rs. 2000.00 on 4.7.1987. Thus a total amount of Rs. 3300.00 was paid by the husband. On 17th June, 1987, the Magistrate in the execution proceedings issued non- bailable warrant against the husband. This order is challenged in the present application.

(3.) According to Shri Padhye, when the application for recovery of the amount was made on 7th Nov., 1986, the claim for five months between the period 19th June 1984 to 18th Nov., 1985 was barred by limitation. According to the first proviso of Sub-section (3) of Sec. 125, no warrant therefore could be issued for the recovery of the amount for five months mentioned above.