IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.16038 of 2006 MUNNA MAHTO @ MUNNA KUMAR Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 4 31.7.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner who is aggrieved by order dated 27.1.2006 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, West Champaran at Bettiah, in Trial No. 170 of 2005, whereby he has awarded interim maintenance of Rs. 1500/- per month to the applicant wife for maintenance of her children till the disposal of the proceeding. Also heard learned A.P.P. for the State. Although the applicant wife has appeared by filing vakalatnama but no one appeared on her behalf at the time of hearing. Assailing the order impugned it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is in possession of one bigha of land and has old parents to look after and that apart he has no extra income from any other sources and in this situation he is not in position to pay the amount ordered by the Court. The fact that the applicant is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner is not denied and the petitioner is ready and willing to keep the wife with him. However, it is due to the situation created by the petitioner that the wife is not ready to live with the husband and has claimed maintenance under section 125 Cr.P.C. Section 125 Cr.P.C. does not offend Article 14 of the Constitution and is a measure of social justice and is specially enacted to protect woman and children and falls within the constitutional sweep of Article 15(3) reinforced by Article 39 of the Constitution. - 2 - Admittedly Section 125 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 is a measure of social justice intended to protect women and children ( see Vimila Vs Veeraswamy reported in ( 1991) 2 SCC 375). From the impugned order it appears that the said interim maintenance awarded by the Court is exclusively for the benefit of the children and not for the wife. Admittedly all the three children are minors and the Court is fully justified in providing for the maintenance of the minor children. I do not find any apparent illegality or impropriety in the impugned order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, West Champaran at Bettiah. There is no merit in this application which is accordingly dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)