Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. In reply, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court awarding interim maintenance allowance in favour of the applicants in a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is an interim order, therefore, no execution application can be filed under Section 128 Cr.P.C. As such, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is maintainable.

7. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the present application.

19. For deciding the present issue, it would be worthwhile to reproduce Section 128 Cr.P.C. wherein enforcement or execution of order of maintenance to be passed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., as the case may be, has been provided. For ready reference Section 128 Cr.P.C. reads as follows:

"128. Enforcement of order of maintenance.--A copy of the order of [maintenance or interim maintenance and expenses of proceedings, as the case may be] shall be given without payment to the person in whose favour it is made, or to his guardian, if any, or to the person to [whom the allowance for the maintenance or the allowance for the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding, as the case may be] is to be paid; and such order may be forced by any Magistrate in any place where the person against whom it is made may be, on such Magistrate being satisfied as to the identity of the parties and the non-payment of the [allowance, or as the case may be, expenses, due]."

21. Where an order is passed directing to pay maintenance, the party in whose favour such an order has been passed has got two options. The first one is the party can choose to approach the Court under Section 125 (3) Cr.P.C. requesting the Court to punish the defaulter by imposing appropriate imprisonment; the second one is to approach the Court under Section 128 of Cr.P.C.

22. A comparison of Sections 125 (3) and 128 of Cr.P.C. would keep things beyond any doubt that insofar as the proceeding under Section 125 (3) is concerned, the statute has prescribed a period of limitation of one year, whereas in respect of a proceeding under Section 128 of Cr.P.C., there is no limitation provided at all. It follows, therefore, by the terms of the statute, that, for initiating a proceeding for enforcing an order by invoking Section 128 of Cr.P.C., I find no provision providing for limitation as it is provided in respect of proceedings under Section 125(3) of Cr.P.C.

29. From bare perusal of the provisions of Sections 125 to 128 Cr.P.C. as also the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam (Supra), I am of the view that since the order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, granting interim maintenance to the applicants in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a quasi judicial civil and criminal order, no application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. either for quashing the same or for enforcing the same, is maintainable.

30. Consequently, the present application filed by the applicants for enforcing the order passed by the Family Court granting interim maintenance allowance to them is dismissed. The proper remedy available to the applicants to approach the Family Court under Section 128 Cr.P.C. before the same court.