Open iDraf
Khedani Rajwarin v. Lagan Singh

Khedani Rajwarin
v.
Lagan Singh

(High Court Of Judicature At Patna)

Criminal Reference No. 72 of 1920 | 02-12-1920


Jwala Prasad, J.

1. This is a reference by the District Magistrate of Shahabad, under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, recommending that the order of the Sub Divisional Officer, dated the 17th September 1940, directing that the maintenance allowed under section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by his previous order of the 26th February 1907, should be paid until the girl is 14 years of age, that is, until the 2nd of May 1921, be set aside.

2. There is no limit of age placed by section 488 for the maintenance allowance awarded under that section to be paid. Under the English Law the age is specified under the various Statutes from 13 to 16 years. But as there is no express specification in the Indian Law, no limit can at all be placed. It has, however, been held that maintenance is to be allowed until the child can maintain itself: Bhagat Singh v. Emperor 6 Ind. Cas. 690 : 28 P.W.R. 1910 Cr : 11 Cr.L.J. 457; though in the cane of Krishnasamy Iyer v. Chandravadhana 20 Ind Cas 1005 : 37 M. 565 : 25 M.L.J. 349 : (1913) M.W.N. 695 : 14 M.L.T. 224 : 14 Cr.L.J. 525 it was held that "child" means a person who has not attained the age of majority. In the absence of any definition of the word "child" in the Act, or to any limit of age placed upon it, I would accept the decision of the Punjab Court that the maintenance allowed is to continue so long as the person is unable to maintain himself. The omission to define the age was probably intentional so as to allow the maintenance to continue even throughout the life, if owing to some mental or corporeal defect the person is unable to maintain himself: Thambuswamy Pillay v. Ma Loue 37 Ind Cas 311 : 18 Cr.L.J. 103 : 9 L.B.R. 49 : 10 Bur L.T. 209 (Burma). It is a question of fact in each case as to whether a child can maintain itself or not. Hence, without such enquiry the main tenancy allowance cannot be limited in the way as has been done by the Sub-Divisional Officer. His order, dated the 17th September 1920, must, therefore, be set aside. He will have to decide, if and when an application, is made to him, whether or not the child is capable of maintaining itself, and if be finds that the child is capable of maintaining itself, the maintenance allowance under section 488 will cease to be paid.

Advocates List

NONE

For Petitioner
  • Shekhar Naphade
  • Mahesh Agrawal
  • Tarun Dua
For Respondent
  • S. Vani
  • B. Sunita Rao
  • Sushil Kumar Pathak

Bench List

Hon'ble Justice 

Jwala Prasad

Eq Citation

61 IND. CAS. 64

LQ/PatHC/1920/334

HeadNote

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 — S. 488 — Maintenance allowance — Age of child — When to cease — Held, no limit of age placed by S. 488 for maintenance allowance awarded under that section to be paid — In absence of any definition of the word "child" in the Act, or to any limit of age placed upon it, maintenance allowed is to continue so long as the person is unable to maintain himself — It is a question of fact in each case as to whether a child can maintain itself or not — Hence, without such enquiry maintenance allowance cannot be limited in the way as has been done by the Sub-Divisional Officer — His order, dated 17-9-1920, must, therefore, be set aside — He will have to decide, if and when an application, is made to him, whether or not the child is capable of maintaining itself, and if he finds that the child is capable of maintaining itself, the maintenance allowance under S. 488 will cease to be paid — English Law — Maintenance of Wife and Children — Age of child