Abstract

Under Section 125 of The Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (CrPC) obligation is casted on a person to provide maintenance to his wife and his/her parents who are unable to maintain themselves. A person also has an obligation to maintain his/her minor child who are physically or mentally disabled till they reach the age of majority. Further, a person is also obliged to maintain his legitimate and illegitimate child under this section. Section 125 of CrPC, was enacted to provide speedy remedy to the person entitled for maintenance. Therefore, the section also provides that interim maintenance may be granted by the court till the issue of maintenance is not decided on merit. The court can issue a warrant for levying the amount due against any person who has been ordered to pay maintenance. If the warrant is unsuccessful then the court may send the person in default to imprisonment of one month. Such warrant can be issued for each month’s default. However, application should be made to the Court to levy such amount within a period of one year from the date on which it became due. It means that application for levy warrant to the court can only be made of any arears of amount pending one year before the application. This limitation is contained in the first proviso of section 125(3) of CrPC. It is this interpretation of this proviso where often courts have made an error. Courts have at times misinterpreted this proviso. They have issued a levy warrant for recovery of arrears of amount due for more than one year prior to the date of recovery application. This paper is an attempt to find out the correct interpretation of the said proviso on the basis of various High Court and Supreme Court precedent. For the sake of convenience, this research paper is divided into three parts. The first part highlights the problem of issuance of levy Warrant for recovery of maintenance. Next part deals with the law on issuance of levy warrant for recovery of maintenance and also highlights the meaning and interpretation of the phrase “Date on Which Maintenance Amount Becomes Due’. The third part analyses the Judicial Interpretation of the Law on Issue of Levy Warrant for Recovery of Maintenance and last part provides the conclusions and makes suggestion.

Keywords