In this case of Abhilasha Vs Prakash, appeal was filed by a woman against the decision of the High Court against her husband for maintenance under section 125 of the CrPc to herself and her three children, two sons and a daughter. Her youngest daughter, named Abhilasha is the appellant in the present case.

Her application for maintenance was rejected by the Judicial Magistrate to her two children but her daughter's claim for maintenance was allowed because she was a minor but she was entitled to maintenance only upon the time she attained majority as per section 125 CrPC.

The four applicants then moved to the session court which stated that the appellant i.e., Abhilasha is entitled to maintenance only up to the time when she attains majority and not after that. Then she moved to the High Court where her application was rejected. She filed an appeal to the Supreme Court which was dismissed.

Facts Of Case:
In this case an application was recorded by the mother of the appealing party on October 17, 2002 under Section 125 CrPC against her spouse (the respondent) for herself and her three children. Her youngest daughter is the appellant in the present appeal. On February 16, 2011 the Judicial Magistrate of First Class dismissed her application for maintenance for everything but allowed the grant for maintenance for the appealing party until she attains the age of majority.

Afterwards all four of them filed an application before the Sessions Judge Court, Rewari for criminal revision but their application was also dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge by the judgement delivered on February 17, 2014. The Respected judge held that under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code the appellant is permitted to maintenance only up to the time when she has attained majority and not after that because according to the provisions of Section 125 of CrPC just those youngsters who are major can be permitted maintenance who by any physical or mental sickness or any injury caused to them can't keep up with themselves. Here the appellant had no such situation so she is granted to maintenance till April 26, 2005 till she achieves the period of majority and not after that.

Then an appeal was filed to High Court against the judgement of the Additional Sessions Judge which was reject on February 16, 2018 by the High Court. Then they filed an appeal to the Supreme Court.

Issues Raised:

• Whether the appellant who has attained majority and is unmarried is entitled to maintenance from the respondent under the provisions of Section 125 of the CrPC in spite of the fact she is not suffering from any physical/ mental infirmity or injury?
   
• Whether the orders which were passed by the Judicial Magistrate and Additional Sessions Court Judge which limited the right of appellant to claim maintenance until she attains the age of majority i.e., till April 26, 2005 can be set aside making the respondent liable to pay maintenance to his daughter even after she attains majority i.e., after April 26, 2005 and is unmarried?

Related Provisions
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 125 - Order of Maintenance of Wives, children and parents.

This Section states that:

1. If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain:
   
   1. his wife, unable to maintain herself, or
   2. his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or
      1. Subs. by Act 45 of 1978, s. 12, for" Chief Judicial Magistrate" (w. e. f, 18- 12- 1978).
   3. his legitimate or illegitimate child (not being a married daughter) who has attained majority, where such child is, by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself, or
   4. his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself, a Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, at such monthly rate not exceeding five hundred rupees in the whole, as such Magistrate thinks fit, and to pay the same to such person as the Magistrate may from time to time direct:
      
      Provided that the Magistrate may order the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b) to make such allowance, until she attains her majority, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband of such minor female child, if married, is not possessed of sufficient means.
      Explanation: For the purposes of this Chapter:
      
      1. "minor" means a person who, under the provisions of the Indian Majority Act, 1875 (9 of 1875); is deemed not to have attained his majority;
      2. "wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband and has not remarried.

The Hindu Adoption And Maintenance Act, 1956

Section 20 - Maintenance of Children and aged parents

This section states that:
Subject to the provisions of this section a Hindu is bound, during his or her lifetime, to maintain his or her legitimate or illegitimate children and his or her aged or infirm parents.

A legitimate or illegitimate child may claim maintenance from his or her father or mother so long as the child is a minor.

(3) The obligation of a person to maintain his or her aged or infirm parent or a daughter who is unmarried extends in so far as the parent or the unmarried daughter, as the case may be, is unable to maintain himself or herself out of his or her own earnings or other property.

Explanation: In this section "parent" includes a childless step-mother.

Judgement
The Supreme Court expressed that a Hindu daughter who is unmarried is qualified for get maintenance from her dad until the time she gets hitched as per the Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 but to get the maintenance she should demonstrate that she can't keep up with herself.

He should record an application under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act to implement her freedoms, yet for this situation since the application was filed under Section 125 of the CrPC and not under the Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act the case was not maintainable. Under Section 125 CrPC only those children who are major are entitled to maintenance who cannot maintain themselves due to any physical or mental abnormality or injury and this was not the case with the appellant so she is not entitled to maintenance.

The Supreme Court later talked about and expressed the distinction between Section 20 of the Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act and Section 125 of the CrPC in detail. Section 125 CrPC gives prompt help to a candidate in an outline proceeding though Segment 20 of the Hindu Reception and Support Act has a bigger extension, larger right which not set in stone by a Civil Court.

Analysis Of The Judgement
In Section 125(1)(C) of CrPC, a legitimate or illegitimate child, who is unmarried but attained majority and experiencing mental or actual irregularities/injury, unfit to keep up with herself can claim maintenance from her father, who has neglected/refused to maintain.

In this case, SC settled on a reasonable decision, according to section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, an unmarried daughter who attained majority can claim maintenance from her father when she is not able to maintain herself and reliant upon others.

The Magistrate rejected the application but the SC noticed that the magistrate court granted the award of interim maintenance according the section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The application is granted. Unmarried daughter claiming maintenance from her father, who is unable to maintain herself is also a right granted by personal law, which can be enforced.

Conclusion
The SC held that, according to section 20 of the act, it is a legal commitment of a Hindu to maintain his/her old age parents and child who is unmarried and not able to maintain herself. A daughter who is as yet unmarried however accomplished the age of majority and isn't experiencing any lethal injury or mental/physical disorder isn't qualified to claim maintenance from her father under the provisions of CrPC.

The primary point of this section is to give quick alleviation to the litigant. The court excused the request however gave freedom to the appealing party to claim the maintenance from her father according to the section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

Also Read:

• Abhilasha v/s Prakash And ors