Kerala High Court
Ummer vs State Of Kerala on 5 June, 2024
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 15TH JYAISHTA,
1946
OP(CRL.) NO. 387 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED IN MC NO.12 OF 2017 OF FAMILY
COURT, OTTAPPALAM
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:
UMMER, AGED 43 YEARS
S/O.MUHAMMAD, VATTAPPARAMBIL HOUSE,
THIRUVILWAMALA.P.O., THALAPPILLI TALUK,
THRISSUR - 680 588. NOW UNDERGOING
IMPRISONMENT AT CENTRAL JAIL, VIYYUR,
THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680010
BY ADVS.
LINDONS C.DAVIS
E.U.DHANYA
N.S.SHAMILA
CHINJU P. JOYIES
RESPONDENTS/STATE AND PETITIONERS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031
2 SAISA, AGED 38 YEARS
D/O.SAITH MUHAMMED, THOPPILKKUNNATH VEEDU,
PAMPADI.P.O., THIRUVILWAMALA, THALAPPILLI
TALUK, THRISSUR, PIN - 680588
3 MUHAMMAD FARAS (MINOR), AGED 14 YEARS
S/O.UMMER, THOPPILKKUNNATH HOUSE,
PAMPADI.P.O., THIRUVILWAMALA, THALAPPILLI
TALUK, THRISSUR - 680588. REPRESENTED BY
GUARDIAN MOTHER, SAISA, AGED 38 YEARS,
D/O.SAITH MUHAMMED, THOPPILKKUNNATH HOUSE,
PAMPADI.P.O., THIRUVILWAMALA, THALAPPILLI
TALUK, THRISSUR, PIN - 680588
ADV.NOUSHAD K A, PP
THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
OP(CRL.) 387/2024
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J
......................................................
O.P.(Crl.) No.387 of 2024
...................................................
Dated this the 5th day of June, 2024
JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges the order dated 26.02.2024 produced as Ext.P4.
2. By the impugned order the petitioner has been committed to jail for
a period of four months, for nonpayment of Rs.2,48,500/- which is
the arrears of maintenance due to the respondent.
3. During the course of arguments this Court enquired the possibilities
of the petitioner paying a portion of the amount in arrears. After
instructions, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that
petitioner is not in a position to pay any amount. Since the statute
prescribes committing a defaulter to jail, I am of the view that there
is no error in the impugned order.
4. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the
decision in Shahada Khatoon and others v. Amjad Ali and others
2000 KHC 128, I am of the view that the principle laid down in
Shahada Khatoon was considered by other courts and it has been
OP(CRL.) 387/2024
held in Santhosh v. State of Kerala 2014 (1) KLT 98 and held that 'a
months imprisonment' for every months default is a maximum period
of imprisonment under Section 125(3) Cr.P.C. and not a maximum of
one month's imprisonment for the total default.
In view of the above, there is no error in the impugned order and
this original petition is dismissed.
sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AMV/06/06/2024
OP(CRL.) 387/2024
APPENDIX OF OP(CRL.) 387/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.11.2020 IN MC
NO.12/2017 OF THE FAMILY COURT OTTAPALM
EXHIBIT P2 A COPY OF THE CMP NO.52/2021 IN MC.12/2017
BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, OTTAPALAM
EXHIBIT P3 A COPY OF THE CMP NO.443/2022 IN MC.12/2017
BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, OTTAPALAM
EXHIBIT P4 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2024 IN CMP
NO.52/2021 IN MC.12/2017 BEFORE THE FAMILY
COURT, OTTAPALAM
EXHIBIT P5 A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26.02.2024 IN CMP
NO.443/2022 IN MC.12/2017 BEFORE THE FAMILY
COURT, OTTAPALAM
TRUE COPY
