Court Orders Direct Bank Deposits for Maintenance, Emphasizes No Need for Successive Applications
In a landmark decision, the Allahabad High Court has reaffirmed the continuous liability of husbands to pay maintenance without the necessity of filing successive execution applications. The judgment was delivered by Justice Praveen Kumar Giri in the case of Mala Kumari v. State of U.P., underscoring the importance of maintenance as a measure of social legislation for the welfare of wives and children.
The revision petition filed by Mala Kumari challenged the Family Court’s decision to reject her application for continuous maintenance under Section 128 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and Section 147 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (B.N.S.S.). The court emphasized that maintenance is a continuous obligation and must be construed liberally to benefit the wife and children, thereby negating the necessity for successive legal filings to enforce maintenance orders.
The court highlighted that the first proviso to Section 125(3) Cr.P.C., which pertains to the limitation for recovery of arrears of maintenance, does not extinguish the right to claim such arrears beyond one year. This limitation is merely procedural, applicable to the issuance of recovery warrants, not to the substantive right to claim maintenance arrears or future maintenance.
The judgment further directed that maintenance payments should be deposited directly into the verified bank accounts of the claimants. Additionally, employers are instructed to deduct the maintenance amount directly from the salaries of salaried individuals to ensure compliance. The court warned that non-compliance could lead to disciplinary and contempt proceedings.
In its directives, the court ordered that all Presiding Officers of Family Courts and Gram Nyayalayas across Uttar Pradesh must ensure strict compliance with these guidelines. The district administration and police authorities have also been directed to assist in the enforcement of maintenance orders, with discussions on execution issues to be included in Monitoring Cell meetings.
Justice Praveen Kumar Giri’s decision is poised to streamline the enforcement of maintenance orders and uphold the rights of women and children, reinforcing judicial directions for a more efficient legal process.
Bottom line:-
Section 125 Cr.P.C. and Section 144(3) B.N.S.S. - Maintenance is a continuous liability - Successive execution applications are not required to be filed to enforce maintenance orders.
Statutory provision(s): Section 125 Cr.P.C., Section 144(3) B.N.S.S., Section 128 Cr.P.C., Section 147 B.N.S.S.
Mala Kumari v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2947396
