Maintenance of Wife: The Orissa High Court, in the case of Banshidhar Mohanty vs. Smt. Jyoshnarani Mohanty has delivered a judgment that : The judgment emphasizes that if the respondent has already been granted maintenance under the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. She is no longer legally entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C). The judgment suggests that the appellant (presumably the husband) has the option to file an application to cancel the maintenance order under Section 125, Cr.P.C., with effect from the date when the respondent was granted a decree under the Act, 1956. If such an application is filed within two months. The order of maintenance will be canceled from the appropriate date, strictly in accordance with the law.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 125, 127 & Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Section 18 – Grant of maintenance to wife under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. Wife receiving maintenance u/s 125 Cr.P.C. before the order under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act – Held that, when the respondent/wife has been granted maintenance under the provision of the Act, 1956, she is no more legally entitled to claim for maintenance under S.125 Cr.P.C. The husband may apply to annul the maintenance order from the date the respondent receives a decree under the 1956 Act.

Maintenance of Wife Under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 24

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 125, 127 & 482. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 24 Simultaneous proceedings under both- Effect thereof – Held, when the matter is already before a competent Civil Court. The wife seeking an order under Section 125, Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate is inappropriate.

Further under S. 127 of the Cr.P.C., if an order regarding maintenance is passed by the competent Civil Court, the Magistrate should have to set aside its order which is more like a temporary measure made after a summary hearing to meet an emergent situation, the fact of seizing the Magistrate when the competent Civil Court has been already seized would cause only judicial waste of time since the order obtained is ultimately liable to be canceled as it is against the scheme of law contemplated under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Chap, IX of the Cr.P.C. Petition allowed-Proceeding Quashed.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125 Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 24 Hindu Maintenance allowed in both proceedings. Held that the maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act be paid after deducting therefrom the amount that the husband would be paying in compliance with the order of the Criminal Court.3

Keep Section 125 Cr.P.C. in abeyance until the wife receives alimony pendent lite under Section 24 of the HM Act.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 24. Maintenance allowed in both proceedings Held that the order passed about maintenance under section 125 Cr.P.C. Shall be kept in abeyance so long the wife gets alimony pendent lite under section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The order made under section 125 Cr.P.C. will become operative soon the order under section 24 ceases to exist.

Legal Principles and Precedents on Maintenance in Hindu Family Law

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 24 – Maintenance allowed in both proceedings. Appeal against such order Held that a party should not get double maintenance amount from husband passed in separate proceedings. Thus, maintenance granted under Section 24 of the Act, 1955 should be adjustable towards amount granted under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

Wife was granted maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. from her husband, as per the Code of Cr.P.C, 1973, Section 125.

A subsequent petition was filed under the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, Sections 18 & 21, seeking maintenance from her son.

In response, the son filed a petition challenging the order granting maintenance to his mother.

The court held that Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, applies only when the father is unable to maintain his wife. And if the husband is capable, the son cannot be held liable. The order directing the son to pay Rs. 1000/- per month as interim maintenance was quashed and set aside.

The wife can claim maintenance under either Section 125 Cr.P.C. or Section 24 H.M. orders.

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 125 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Section 24-Maintenance allowed in both applications. In such situation it is held that, the wife shall be entitled to claim maintenance under one of the two orders of the Magistrate under Section 125 Cr.P.C. & under Section 24 H. M. Act and it would be for her to choose as to which of the two orders she wants to enforce.

Conclusion

Furthermore the intricate interplay of laws, including the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, necessitates careful consideration. Orissa High Court rulings emphasize that if a wife gets maintenance under Hindu Adoptions Act, Section 125 forfeits. The courts stress coherence and coordination between civil and criminal proceedings, advocating adjustment of maintenance amounts. Instances highlight contested son liability for maintenance, quashed when the husband supported his wife. These principles guide appropriate avenues for maintenance claims, ensuring a fair and just legal application in familial contexts.