Wife and child challenged the Family Court's dismissal of their interim maintenance claim under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the husband having denied the marriage. The High Court held that proof of relationship was a matter of evidence for the Family Court and declined to interfere, dismissing the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page 1 of 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
237 CRR-F-52-2022(O&M)
Date of order: 08.08.2024
Bindu & Another
…..Petitioner(s)
Vs.
Harmesh Mattu @ Hamesh Mattu
…..Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:Ms. Ravinder Kaur Manaise, Advocate for the petitioners.
None for the respondent . *****
Nidhi Gupta, J.
Challenge in the presen t petition is to the order date d
15.11.2021 p assed by the learned Addition a l Principal Judge, Family Court , Gurdaspur, whereby in a proceeding u n der Section 125 Cr.P.C., th e application f iled by the petitioners for gra n t of interim maintenance, ha s been dismis s ed.
2. Learned counsel for th e petitioners submits that th e application o f the petitioners has been dismissed on a purely spuriou s ground that the respondent had denied his marriage with petitioner No.1 . It is submitt e d that in actual fact, petitione r No.1 had solemnized marriag e with the re s pondent on 11.12.2017 and p e titioner No.2 was born out o f their wedlo c k on 26.03.2019. Present petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C . was filed by the petitioners on 24.07.2019 ( Annexure P1). It is accordingly , prayed that t he impugned order be set asid e .
SUNENA 2024.08.14 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Page 2 of 3
3. No other argument is ma d e on behalf of the petitioner.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner an d perused the case file in great detail.
5. Perusal of the written st a tement (Annexure P4) filed b y the respond e nt to the petitioners’ petition u nder Section 125 Cr.P.C. show s that he has categorically stated in para … … … thereof, that: “…there is n o relationship of the respondent with the ap p licants. The respondent is stil l unmarried and he never solemnized his m a rriage with applicant No.1. …… The applica n t No.1 is married with Babbi B h atti at Village Luna, Tehsil an d District Gur d aspur and out of the wedloc k of applicant No.1 and Babb i Bhatti a female child namely Nannu Bhatti w as also born out and applican t No.1 is resi d ing in the house of above sai d Babbi Bhatti. ……”. A furthe r perusal of the said written statement re f lects that the respondent ha s categorically denied that any marriage wa s solemnized between him and the petition e r No.1 on 11.12.2017.
6. Needless to say, in view o f the aforesaid categoric denia l
by the resp o ndent of any relationship be t ween the parties, the learne d Family Cour t was correct in holding that p r ior to determining the interim maintenanc e , it was firstly necessary to est a blish the relationship betwee n the parties. Although, petitioner No.1 has attached birth certificate an d Aadhaar Ca r d of petitioner No.2/minor child, however, these are al l matters of e v idence and have to be considered by the learned Family Cour t after being p roven in accordance with law. As such, it i s neither desirabl e
SUNENA 2024.08.14 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Page 3 of 3
nor feasible for this Court to interfere at this stage, let alone return a finding in re s pect of the contrary assertion s made by either of the parties. As such, the present petition is dismissed.
08.08.2024 Sunena
(Nidhi Gupta) Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No
SUNENA 2024.08.14 10:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court erred in dismissing the application for interim maintenance where the respondent denied the marital relationship.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bindu & Another
Harmesh Mattu @ Hamesh Mattu
Nidhi Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
