Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.23 seconds)Section 127 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Chaturbhuj vs Sita Bai on 27 November, 2007
In Chaturbhuj vs. Sita Bai reported in (AIR 2008 SC 530) = 2008 2
SCC 316, it has been held that Section 125 is a measure of social justice and
is especially enacted to protect women and children, para 5 to 8 of the
judgment is extracted hereunder:
Sunita Kachwaha And Ors vs Anil Kuchwaha on 28 October, 2014
In the judgment reported in AIR 2015 SC 554 (Sunita Kachwaha &
Ors. vs. Anil Kachwaha ) the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that where the wife
states she had great hardships in maintaining herself and the daughters,
while her husband's economic condition is quite good the wife would be
entitled to maintenance. In the very same judgment it has also been held that
merely because the wife was earning something it would not be a ground to
reject her claim for maintenance.
Section 397 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 401 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya vs State Of Gujarat And Ors on 10 March, 2005
The aforesaid
position was highlighted in Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya v. State of Gujarat
and Ors. (2005 (2) Supreme 503).
Captain Ramesh Chander Kaushal vs Mrs. Veena Kaushal And Ors. on 22 August, 1978
5. The object of the maintenance proceedings is not to punish a person for
his past neglect, but to prevent vagrancy by compelling those who can provide
support to those who are unable to support themselves and who have a moral
claim to support. The phrase "unable to maintain herself" in the instant case
would mean that means available to the deserted wife while she was living
with her husband and would not take within itself the efforts made by the
wife after desertion to survive somehow. Section 125 Cr.P.C. is a measure of
social justice and is specially enacted to protect women and children and as
noted by this Court in Captain Ramesh Chander Kaushal v. Mrs. Veena Kaushal
and Ors. (AIR 1978 SC 1807) falls within constitutional sweep of Article
15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short
the 'Constitution'). It is meant to achieve a social purpose. The object is
to prevent vagrancy and destitution. It provides a speedy remedy for the
supply of food, clothing and shelter to the deserted wife. It gives effect to
fundamental rights and natural duties of a man to maintain his wife, children
and parents when they are unable to maintain themselves.
Bhagwan Dutt vs Kamla Devi And Anr on 17 October, 1974
In Bhagwan v. Kamla Devi (AIR
1975 SC 83) it was observed that the wife should be in a position to maintain
standard of living which is neither luxurious nor penurious but what is
consistent with status of a family. The expression "unable to maintain
herself" does not mean that the wife must be absolutely destitute before she
can apply for maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.?
Article 39 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
1