Manoj Yadav v. Pushpa @ Kiran Yadav
Case brief
What is this about?
Supreme Court modified its prior notice order regarding State amendments fixing a maximum maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. It held prima facie that post-2001 parliamentary amendment, State caps are invalid under Article 254(1) and violative of Articles 14 and 21, issuing notice to five States with counter affidavits.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
A
[2010] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 897
MANOJ YADAV
v.
PUSHPA @ KIRAN YADAV (Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).6568 of 2009)
B
NOVEMBER 23, 2010
[MARKANDEY KAT JU AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
c
s. 125 - Maintenance to wife - Order dated 23. 11. 2010 passed by Supreme Court issuing notice to certain States which by amendments limited maximum amount of maintenance to Rs. 15001- per month - HELD: The State amendments were made for the benefit of the women because at that time the 2001 amendment deleting the maximum limit had not been enacted by Parliament and there was a maximum limit of Rs.5001- per month in s.125 (1) for grant as maintenance - Order dated 22.11.2010 modified - The States which had made the amendments prior to the 2001 Amendment enhancing the maintenance from Rs. 5001- per month to a higher figure are States of Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tripura and Uttar Pradesh - Notice to issue to these States - The Court is of the prima facie view that in view of the 2001 Amendment to the Code by Parliament, the maximum maintenance prescribed by the State Legislatures concerned is no longer valid in view of Article 254(1) of the Constitution, apart from being unconstitutional as being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution - Order dated 22. 11. 2010 accordingly modified - Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14, 21 and 254(1).
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether State amendments capping maintenance under Section 125(1) CrPC remain valid after Parliament's 2001 amendment removing the ceiling.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Manoj Yadav
- respondent
Pushpa @ Kiran Yadav
Coram
Markandey Katju
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Decided on
- · November
- CNR
- ESCR010009082010
- Citation
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court