The case in which it has been held that “widowed daughter-in-law is not liable to maintain her parents-in-law under Section 125 CrPC” is of Bombay High Court, its Aurangabad Bench titled Shobha Sanjay Tidke v. Kishanrao Ramrao Tidke. The order was passed on 12th April 2023.
The verdict came from a Single-judge Justice Kishore Sant. The honourable Justice set aside the orders of a Nyayadhikari Gram Nyayalaya which had ordered in contrary to the judgment given by the Bombay High Court that Shobha Tidke who is the daughter-in-law has the duty to maintain her parents-in-law under Section 125 CrPC.
In the case the High Court noted the provisions of Section 125 of CrPC and stated that parents-in-law are no where mentioned in Section to be able to claim maintenance. The Court even declared that in a similar case has already passed similar rulings as is in the present case.
“Reading of the Section 125, it is clear that the father-in-law and mother-in-law are not mentioned in the said Section. Even for the Clause (a) to (d), those are qualified by further wording as unable to maintain himself or herself,” the Court observed.
“It is held that it is not the scheme of legislature and the legislature has not included parents-in-law in Section 125. The list given of the relations is exhaustive and there is no scope for any other interpretation,” the Court further stated.
Petitioner Shobha Tidke whose case was presented by Advocate JM Murkute was the daughter-in-law. Her husband used to work as a conductor with Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation. Shobha later on got a job in the State’s Health department.
The old parents-in-law claimed from her their maintenance on the reasons that they are aged and are not able to maintain and look after themselves.
Their claim for maintenance was permitted by the Nyayadhikari Gram Nyayalaya, Jalkot in Latur district.
However, the petitioner had opposed the order of the above-mentioned Gram Nyayalaya on the ground that her parents-in-law have four married daughters, all well settled. The all four daughters even have a share in property of their parents and thus shall maintain their parents.
She also put forward that her in-laws in themselves have 2.30 acres of land approximately and after the death of her husband, her mother-in-law had received a sum of Rupees 1.88 lakh. Even some amount was paid to her minor sinor, the petitioner further submitted.
The counsel representing the in-laws i.e. Advocate Subhash S. Chillarge supporting his contention through an order of High Court where it was held that widowed daughter-in-law has duty to maintain her parents-in-law stated that in the present case, the parents-in-laws were dependent on their son fully and when all the property shall be transferred in the name of Shobha, it becomes her responsibility to maintain her in-laws.
However, the petitioner opposed the contentions of the counsel representing the in-laws by pointing out the case in which court had ruled out that maintenance by daughter-in-law of parents-in-law is on different footing. She even stated that in the case she did not got her job on compassionate basis (as in other case) and has not replaced her husband and hence not bound by law to maintenance of her parents-in-law under Section 125 CrPC.
Accepting the contentions given by the petitioner, the bench quashed the orders of the Nyayadhikari Gram Nyayalaya and declared that the widowed daughter-in-law is not liable to maintain her parents-in-law under Section 125 CrPC.
Written by Sonakshi Misra, 2nd year (4th semester) B.A.LL.B. Hons. student at Atal Bihari Vajpayee School of Legal Studies, Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur.
0 Comments