Court Rules Formal Guardianship Appointment Not Mandatory for Filing Maintenance Petition Under Section 125 CrPC; Family Court's Order Dismissing Interim Maintenance Application Set Aside
In a significant judgment delivered on October 13, 2026, the Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur Bench, presided over by Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal, clarified that a maternal grandmother, having actual care and custody of a minor child, has the legal standing to file a maintenance application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) on behalf of the minor, even in the absence of formal appointment as a legal guardian under Order XXXII of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
The case arose from a petition filed by Miss Siddhi Chaurasiya, a minor child, through her maternal grandmother (referred to as "next friend"), seeking interim maintenance from her father, Mr. Sailendra Chaurasiya. Siddhi's mother passed away in 2018 when Siddhi was only about three years old, after which she was residing with her maternal grandmother. The father had allegedly deserted the mother and was denying paternity and maintenance obligations towards the child.
The Family Court had earlier dismissed the interim maintenance application on the ground that the maternal grandmother was not a duly appointed legal guardian, and thus had no locus standi to file the petition. The Court held that unless the grandmother obtained legal custody through formal procedures under Order XXXII CPC, she could not represent the child in a maintenance proceeding.
However, upon hearing the revision petition, the Madhya Pradesh High Court overturned this decision. The Court emphasized the welfare-oriented and summary nature of proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, which are aimed at preventing neglect and securing basic maintenance for dependents like minor children. The Court observed that strict technicalities relating to guardianship appointment under civil law should not be allowed to defeat the substantive right of a minor child to claim maintenance from a legally obligated parent.
Relying on authoritative precedents including the Supreme Court decision in Nagaiah v. Chowdamma AIR 2018 SC 459 and various High Court rulings from Madras, Kerala, and Punjab & Haryana, the Court held that a person with sufficient interest in the minor - in this case, the maternal grandmother who has actual custody - is competent to maintain proceedings for the child's maintenance. The Court also clarified that the right to maintenance is that of the minor child and not the representative, and the procedural irregularity concerning guardianship cannot prejudice the child's statutory entitlement.
Rejecting the respondent's argument that the mother was alive at the time and hence the grandmother had no locus standi, the Court noted that the practical reality of custody and care must be considered. The mother's presence does not negate the grandmother's role as the de facto caregiver, especially when the mother is unable to maintain the child. The Court further held that no settlement or compromise between the parents can override the independent right of a minor to claim maintenance.
The matter has been remanded back to the Family Court for fresh consideration of the interim maintenance application in light of this legal position. The Court directed the parties to appear before the Family Court on November 16, 2026, and noted that failure to appear may result in fresh notices being issued.
This judgment strengthens the protective ambit of Section 125 CrPC by ensuring that minor children's rights to maintenance are not thwarted by procedural formalities and technical objections, thereby advancing social justice for vulnerable children.
Bottom Line:
Section 125 CrPC is a welfare-oriented provision. A minor child's claim for maintenance can be instituted through a person having sufficient interest in the child, such as the maternal grandmother who has actual care and custody. Absence of formal appointment as legal guardian under Order XXXII CPC cannot defeat the minor's claim for interim maintenance.
Statutory provision(s):
Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Order XXXII, Civil Procedure Code, 1908
Siddhi Chaurasiya v. Sailendra Chaurasiya, (Madhya Pradesh)(Jabalpur) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2999887
