Last Updated on December 4, 2023 by News Desk
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that a wife’s rejection of her application for maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) does not prevent her from seeking monetary relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act).
Justice Prem Narayan Singh stated that a decision made under Section 125 CrPC and Section 12 of the DV Act has no binding effect on each other. The court passed the order on a criminal revision plea challenging a magistrate’s order directing a husband to pay ₹5,000 as interim maintenance under the DV Act to his wife.
The court considered whether the family court’s order under Section 125 CrPC could have any binding effect on the order passed by another court under the DV Act and whether the two proceedings were relevant when they involved the same party.
The bench relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Nagendrappa Natikar vs Neelamma for guidance, which held that any order passed under Section 125 CrPC cannot prevent a wife from seeking remedies under the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act.
Written by: Srijan Raj, @procrastinate_human
