9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Application for restoration of petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was rejected by the Family Court. 2. Contention regarding the power of the Family Court to restore an application dismissed for default under Section 125 of the Code. Analysis: 1. The appellant filed an application under Section 125 of the Code claiming maintenance as a legally married wife, citing neglect by the respondent. The application was transferred to the Family Court, where interim maintenance was allowed. However, the case was dismissed for default when the appellant failed to appear in court due to religious ceremonies. The application for restoration was rejected by the Family Court, leading to the appeal. The appellant argued that the Family Court had the power to restore the petition, while the respondent contended that the rejection was justified. 2. The Family Court relied on previous decisions to assert its power to restore the application, citing inherent powers. However, the appellant's counsel argued that the Family Court's approach was erroneous, emphasizing the appellant's long-standing grievances and the need for a justifiable reason for her absence. The Court delved into legal precedents to determine the extent of the Family Court's powers in restoring dismissed applications under Section 125 of the Code. It was established that while lower courts do not possess inherent powers, they can exercise ancillary or incidental powers for restoration, even in the absence of a specific provision in the Code. 3. Considering the purpose of Section 125 to provide maintenance to neglected individuals, the Court emphasized the need for a compassionate interpretation of the law, especially when dealing with vulnerable sections of society. In this case, the Court found that the appellant's reasons for non-appearance were not unreasonable, and her entitlement to maintenance was prima facie evident. The Court criticized a rigid approach towards non-appearance in maintenance cases, stressing the importance of expeditious disposal of such matters. Consequently, the Court set aside the Family Court's order and directed the expeditious resolution of the proceeding. In conclusion, the High Court allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of a liberal attitude towards non-appearance in maintenance cases under Section 125 of the Code. The Court highlighted the need for expeditious disposal of such matters and directed the parties to appear before the Family Court for further proceedings without delay.
|
