V VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. V PADMAVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed under Sec.482 Cr.P.C. to quash the order passed by the court below granting interim maintenance pending the disposal of the main case. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no opportunity has been given to adduce evidence, that the petitioner is not capable of paying interim maintenance and that the 1st respondent is capable of maintaining herself, and that awarding of interim maintenance is uncalled for. On the other hand, Ms. Anitha Chandra contends that it is a settled law that interim maintenance can be granted pending the enquiry and disposal of main maintenance case under Sec.125 Cr.P.C. and that there is prima facie case for granting interim maintenance as there is emergent situation requiring the payment of maintenance to the 1st respondent. The power of the court to grant interim maintenance is well known and it is a settled law that the said power to grant interim maintenance is implict under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Basing on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Savitri vs. Govind Singh, I have already held in Crl. R.C.No.648 of 1992 that interim maintenance can be granted by the Court in appropriate cases.

(2.) But, in the instant case, what is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that interim maintenance was granted by the court-below without making any enquiry.

(3.) The question for consideration is as to whether any regular enquiry is necessary for granting interim maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. In my considered view, such a regular enquiry is unwarranted for granting interim maintenance. There are valid reasons for holding so. The very object and intendment of the maintenance cases under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is to have a speedy remedy fixing the maximum outer limit at Rs.500/- for each of the dependents with an avowed object of providing shelter, clothing and food to the neglected dependents and the order so passed is tentative in nature capable of being upset by a civil court decree. The proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., even for main cases of maintenance are summary in nature. If that be so, to say that a regular enquiry isnecessary to grant even for interim maintenance is only to make such a relief redundant. By the very nature of the relief being interim, pending the summary proceedings for final maintenance which are susceptible for variance by a civil court decree, no regular enquiry is warranted for payment of interim maintenance. It is sufficient, if the matter is placed before the court-below by even an affidavit or an application and on perusing the counter, if any, filed, the court-below can pass the orders of interim maintenance on being satisfied about the urgency in that regard by fixing a reasonable quantum pending the adjudication of the main maintenance case.