Supreme Court Refuses to Interfere with High Court Order Restoring Maintenance Case.


17 December 2024 Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law   |   Maintenance >> Family Law  

The Supreme Court has dismissed a civil appeal challenging a decision by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, which had restored a maintenance petition filed by the appellant, Deepti Sharma, under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

The appellant had been married to the respondent in 2006, and they had been involved in prolonged legal proceedings. The Family Court in Agra had previously rejected her application for maintenance due to non-prosecution, with her absence on multiple hearings. However, the High Court, in an order dated December 20, 2019, set aside the Family Court's dismissal and restored the application, directing the Family Court to adjudicate the matter on its merits. The High Court’s order followed directions from the Supreme Court, which had earlier intervened in the case.

The Supreme Court had earlier passed an order in September 2019, asking the High Court to expedite the resolution of the petitioner’s matters, including her maintenance and contempt proceedings, and directed that arrears of maintenance be paid promptly. Following this, the Division Bench of the High Court, while deciding the Section 482 CrPC petition filed by the appellant, restored the maintenance application to its original status and instructed the Family Court to decide the case within three months.

 

 

The appellant approached the Supreme Court, seeking further intervention against the High Court’s order. However, the Court found no reason to interfere, emphasizing that the High Court's decision was in the appellant's favor, as it only directed the Family Court to reconsider the maintenance application that had been dismissed due to her earlier non-appearance. The Court also noted that the appellant’s approach of directly challenging the High Court's decision was improper, as the matter was best addressed by the Family Court, which had been directed to hear the case afresh.

Additionally, the Court criticized the appellant for submitting a lengthy and largely irrelevant synopsis, urging the Registry to ensure that litigants appearing in person follow appropriate procedures and limit submissions to necessary details.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court’s order to restore the maintenance petition and allow the Family Court to adjudicate it promptly. The Court's ruling emphasized the importance of following proper legal processes and resolving family disputes at the appropriate judicial levels.


HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973