In a proceeding under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the court does not determine the status of the parties, nor does it issue any findings that have the value of res judicata. The purpose of this section is to preserve peace and avoid strife in society by providing immediate relief to parties who are neglected and who would otherwise resort to vagrancy, mendacity, or other anti-social activities.

In a proceeding under Chapter IX of the Criminal Procedure Code, the role of the Magistrate is solely to ascertain whether there is a prima facie case in the claim of the person approaching the court for immediate relief. The Magistrate has no time or jurisdiction to embark upon an elaborate inquiry.

The intent of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code is to prevent vagrancy by compelling a person to support his wife, child, father, or mother who is unable to support themselves. Given that this is the object and intent, the section does not aim to determine legal rights. The powers of the criminal court under this section are limited in scope, and the orders passed thereunder are subject to any final adjudication that may be made by the civil court regarding the parties' civil rights and status.

The proceedings under this section are summary in nature and cannot be equated to cases like regular civil suits for maintenance or regular criminal prosecutions for bigamy. The orders passed are tentative and subject to the final determination of the parties' rights by the civil court; they are also liable to be varied with changes in circumstances. When these orders are subject to final decisions in civil suits and can be removed by any decree passed in civil proceedings, the degree of proof in maintenance cases arising under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code is lower. It is sufficient to prove that there was a physical union between a man and a woman for a considerable length of time and that a child was born from that physical union, which creates a presumption that the child belongs to the said person.

The provisions under Section 125 are summary in nature and provide for a swift and inexpensive remedy against a person who deprives his wife or neglects or refuses to maintain his minor child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, who is unable to maintain themselves. Section 125 prescribes a summary procedure.

The findings are not final, and the parties are at liberty to assert their rights in a civil court. The summary procedure does not entirely cover the same ground as the civil liability of the husband, father, or son under personal law to maintain his wife, child, or parent. When substantial issues of a civil nature are raised, the remedy lies solely in civil courts. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention of the husband that the revisional court has not considered the legal issues involved in the case. The husband is not without a remedy, and since this case is of a summary nature, when a point is raised before the High Court that was not raised at the earliest opportunity, the High Court would not entertain such a ground at this belated stage.

References:

• K.M.S. Mani vs. Tamizharasi, I (1988) DMC 275 Madras.
• Doddi Nagulu vs. Doddi Mutyalamma, I (1994)