Sec 24 HMA Judgment: wife able bodied

I think she would not get maintenance in 125, because it is a general rule that finding of civil court shall prevail over finding of criminal court.

Held that during the pendency of a filed regular civil court petition under Section 24 of HMA, wife also simultaneously filed a parallel petition under 125 Cr.P.C. of the Code. It was held that the petitioner wife could not be allowed to ride two different horses at the time (two simultaneous proceedings in two different courts) and could not be permitted to continue the maintenance proceedings under section 125 Cr. P.C. when she has already chosen the alternative remedy by filing first a regular civil court suit for maintenance. It is well established that the judgment of the civil court shall prevail over the judgment of the criminal court. The natural justice demands that parallel proceedings cannot be allowed to continue in different courts.-  Ravinder Haribhau Karamkar V/s Shaila Ravinder Karamkar, 1992, Cr. L.J. 1845- Bombay

Decision of civil court that wife is not entitled for maintenance is binding on criminal courts- Judgment and finding of Civil Court prevails over criminal court. -(Cr.L.J-1986-page-1216)

Thanks Aravind

It depends on the circumstances of the case. I differ partially on above views.

There is difference between the provisions envisaged in sec 24 of hma and crpc 125.

There is a very latest and clear HC citation describing above view as well.

sec24 is pendant lite and has a life span of litigation under HMA, wherein claim may exist based on merits.

But sec24 is definitely a judgment (an order which has a lifespan and gets live ONLY during the litigation under HMA. So sec 24 is a suit interim to another suit, but is delivered considering all due facts and merits. One may 'call' it as a precondition to to caus of action under sec24 suit!  Just like 'one needs to be married to get divorce' ) but definitely not a interlocutary (or ad-interim) order wherein the Honble Court passes ad-hoc order as urgent and immediate sanction/relief to aggrieved party.

Another difference is that crpc125 has permanent lifespan!! until wife expires or remarries or fails to remain unchaste whether divorced or otherwise.

In crpc125, interim maintenance may also be granted as interlocutary  (wherein the Honble Court passes ad-hoc order as urgent and immediate sanction/relief to aggrieved party)

At the max, if crpc125 interim order is also passed as 'necessaty for subsistance for wife' until crpc125 suit reaches finality, then that interim maintenance component may be taken into consideration while adjudicating sec24 as well, and vice a versa.

But let's say both suits are filed i.e. sec24 as divorce proceedings also are going on and crpc125.

If family court is quick to adjudicate sec24 before crpc125 (let's say it is peding at another district court!)

and then crpc interlocutary maintenance is not awarded as sec24 verdict gave enough money to wife.

And then divorce suit gets dismissed!!!

Then!!

Wife won't have any interlocutary maintenance which she was entitled under crpc125, until crpc125 reaches finality!!

Hence both suits sec24 and crpc125 are maintenable and court has to decide the amount to be paid, but may take into consideration both the suits.

E.g. under sec24 of hma Fam Court orders 6000 pm

And then under crpc125 another court orders let's say 8000 pm, then it should say until divorce suit is pending and sec24 payments has lifespan JD should pay the 2000 and if divorce suit is adjudicated and disposed of earlier then subsequently JD should start paying 8000. So the DC should continue to receive 8000 in all!!!

The issue was if the women has been adjudged able bodied in sec-24, how can the same facts be interpreted differently in sec-125 and the same women becomes non-able bodied and can't earn and maintenance can be given