Whether maintenance granted U/S 125 of crpc can be recovered using S31 of Domestic violence Act?
On plain reading of this section, the entire enactment and the provisions shall be in addition to all other laws for the time being in force which are not derogatory to the provisions of the other laws. Therefore, it goes without saying that though such remedy of recovery of the maintenance amount is there u/S. 125(3) nevertheless, Section 31 also comes to the help of the victim. It should be borne in mind that a new enactment has been enacted knowing fully well u/S. 125 of the Cr.P.C., speedy remedy is available. Such speedy remedy is also found to be inadequate under the peculiar circumstances of certain cases, perhaps may be the reason that even an order u/S. 125 of the Cr.P.C. in some cases became futile and fruitless because of the unscrupulous husbands by using their ingenious mind successfully avoided to pay maintenance even under the enforcement proceedings u/S. 125(3), that may be the reason, that Section 31 introduced in this particular Act to make such violation of the protection order more stringent, as an offence punishable under this Section, after thorough study of all the existing laws and after taking due care and caution.
38. Having discussed the abovesaid different provisions of the Act, in view of my reasons given above, I am of the firm and considered opinion that an order granting maintenance though u/S. 23 of the Act, if it is passed ex parte or after hearing the parties to the proceedings and even after suffering that order, with knowledge of the order, if the respondent intentionally violates or abuses such an order, it shall be taken as an order deemed to have been passed to prohibit the domestic violence and to protect the victim u/S. 18 of the Act, such violation is punishable u/S. 31 of the Act, as long as such an order is enforceable, unless such order is vacated or cancelled by the competent court.Equivalent Citation: 2015(1) AKR 834, 2015CriLJ1874,AIR 2015(NOC)557 KAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA (DHARWAD BENCH)
Criminal Revision Petition No. 2309 of 2013
Decided On: 28.04.2014
Appellants: Vincent Shanthakumar
Vs.
Respondent: Christina Geetha Rani and Ors.
Vs.
Respondent: Christina Geetha Rani and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:K.N. Phaneendra, J.
-https://www.lawweb.in/2015/06/whether-maintenance-granted-us-125-of.html
