Recently, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that a maternal grandmother caring for a minor child can legally pursue maintenance proceedings on the child’s behalf under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Court rejected a father’s attempt to block the plea on technical grounds, making it clear that procedural objections cannot override a child’s statutory right to financial support.
The case arose after the father challenged the maintainability of a maintenance petition filed through the child’s maternal grandmother, arguing that only the mother, being the natural guardian, could initiate such proceedings. He also claimed that a prior divorce settlement, under which a lump sum amount had allegedly been paid, barred any further maintenance demand. However, the grandmother contended that she had been raising the child and bearing all expenses after the breakdown of the parent’s relationship. The case ultimately turned on whether the law would recognise the reality of caregiving over rigid procedural formalities.
Justice Neerja K. Kalson held that Section 125 of the CrPC is a social welfare provision meant to prevent neglect and destitution and therefore must receive a liberal interpretation. Stressing that the right being enforced belongs to the child and not the person representing the child, the Court observed that “a minor child stands on the highest footing of protection.” The Bench further remarked that “to deny her that capacity would not punish the grandmother, it would prejudice the child.”
Consequently, while rejecting the father’s objections, the Court ruled that a prior settlement between parents cannot extinguish a child’s continuing right to maintenance and directed the trial court to proceed with the matter on the merits, including the determination of maintenance.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
