A. Archana and Krithika Sai, Rep. by mother and guardian vs R. Aravindan

P. Devadass, J.—Archana (1st petitioner) and Krithika Sai (2nd petitioner), who are the wife and daughter of Aravindan (respondent), seek

direction to the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai to expeditiously dispose of their maintenance petition in M.C. No. 142 of 2010.

Archana and Krithika Sai are fighting as against Aravindan for their livelihood. They seek maintenance u/s 125 of Cr.P.C.

Section 125 Cr.P.C. is intended to prevent vagrancy among the wife and children. Section 125 has been inserted in the Code of Criminal

Procedure with a view to quickly dispose of these matters.

As per the Family Courts Act, after the formation of Family Courts in Metropolitan cities or other notified cities, the maintenance cases u/s 125

of Cr.P.C., have to be enquired into by the Family Courts. Thereafter, no Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate, as the case may be,

have jurisdiction to enquire these cases.

Unlike in other criminal cases, in maintenance cases u/s 125 of Cr.P.C., there is no accused, no defacto complainant, no de jure complaint, no

conviction, no case-property and no sentence. The essential requirement to claim maintenance is inability of the wife and children to maintain

themselves and ability of the husband to pay the maintenance, but, he had failed and neglected to maintain them.

Maintenance cases u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. have to be enquired in a summary manner. It should not be tried like a murder case in a Sessions Court

or a complicated suit or appeal suit in a Civil Court. The scope of enquiry u/s 125 of Cr.P.C. is very limited. But, the trial Courts are expanding it,

resulting in the object of introducing Section 125 in Cr.P.C. itself is being thwarted.

In the case on hand, the maintenance petition has been filed as early as in 2010. Now, three years over. Yet, the wife and children still did not

get maintenance. They have to come to this Court for a minimum relief, namely, speedy result/justice.

The woman and children who are affected by the husband, are certainly entitled for speedy justice. With regard to the cases filed u/s 125 of

Cr.P.C., the situation in the Family Courts is very alarming. When a man ties three knots around the neck of a lady, obligation to maintain her has

been imposed. The obligation is on the husband to feed his wife and children. This obligation is eternal in nature. It will come to an end only on her

death or by a judicial process, namely, divorce or nullity of marriage, etc. Till such time, the husband is bound to maintain his wife, who is unable to

maintain herself. Of course, she must be entitled to it.

Maintenance matters shall not be delayed. For getting maintenance, the woman and children should not be made a wage a long drawn legal

battle. There is no pride in disposing of murder cases or complicated civil suits/appeals. The Judge''s pride is in rendering quick justice to the needy

and the affected people. One such cases are maintenance cases.

In the circumstances, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, is directed to dispose of the maintenance case in M.C. No. 142 of

2010, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, preferably, conducting the enquiry on day-to-day basis. With the above

direction, the Criminal Original petition is disposed of.