Sudeep Chaudhary v. Radha Chaudhary ., Supreme Court Of India, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Factual and Procedural Background

The appellant husband and respondent wife are estranged. The wife obtained two separate monetary awards:

Maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) at Rs 350 per month from 3 July 1990, later enhanced to Rs 500 per month.

Interim alimony under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA) at Rs 600 per month on 11 August 1987, later enhanced to Rs 800 per month.

When the husband failed to make payments, the wife initiated recovery proceedings. The husband asserted that the sums payable under Section 125 CrPC should be set off against the interim alimony awarded under Section 24 HMA. The Magistrate accepted this position, but the High Court reversed, ruling that no such adjustment was permissible. The husband sought and obtained special leave to appeal, resulting in the present decision.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant Husband's Arguments

The maintenance amount ordered under Section 125 CrPC should be treated as part of, and therefore adjustable against, the interim alimony awarded under Section 24 HMA.

Respondent Wife's Position

The respondent wife, though served by substituted service, did not appear. The opinion contains no separate articulation of her arguments.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The Court held that the High Court erred in treating the two monetary awards as cumulative. It reasoned—without entering an extensive discussion in the wife’s absence—that:

The maintenance awarded under Section 125 CrPC is adjustable against the interim alimony granted in matrimonial proceedings under Section 24 HMA.

Ordering separate, non-adjustable payments would over-compensate the wife and unsettle the balance of obligations between the parties.

To equitably balance the parties’ interests, the Court crafted a consolidated payment structure, fixing the husband’s liability at Rs 1,000 per month from 3 July 1990, said amount encompassing both statutory maintenance and interim alimony. Any arrears are to be cleared within eight weeks. The Court expressly left open the possibility of different orders at the final disposal of the underlying matrimonial proceedings.

Holding and Implications

APPEAL ALLOWED; HIGH COURT ORDER SET ASIDE. The husband shall pay a consolidated sum of Rs 1,000 per month from 3 July 1990, covering both maintenance and interim alimony; arrears, if any, to be paid within eight weeks.

Implications: The decision confirms, for the purposes of this case, that maintenance under Section 125 CrPC and interim alimony under Section 24 HMA are not ordinarily cumulative. The ruling affects only the parties, is subject to modification at the final stage of matrimonial proceedings, and does not purport to establish new precedent.

Sudeep Chaudhary v. Radha Chaudhary .

S.P Bharucha, J.— Special leave granted.

2. The respondent wife has been served by substituted service but does not appear.

3. The appellant husband and the respondent wife are estranged. The wife filed an application under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code for maintenance which was awarded at the rate of Rs 350 p.m with effect from 3-7-1990, and was subsequently enhanced to Rs 500 p.m

4. In proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act the wife sought alimony. It was granted at the rate of Rs 600 p.m on 11-8-1987, and the amount thereof was subsequently enhanced to Rs 800 p.m

5. Since the husband failed to pay the amount of maintenance as aforesaid, the wife started recovery proceedings. The husband contended that the maintenance amounts should be adjusted against the interim alimony and the Magistrate before whom the recovery proceedings were pending upheld the contention. The High Court, in the order which is under appeal, held that the Magistrate was in error in directing adjustment of the maintenance amount awarded under Section 125 of the CrPC against the amount awarded under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

6. We are of the view that the High Court was in error. The amount awarded under Section 125 of the CrPC for maintenance was adjustable against the amount awarded in the matrimonial proceedings and was not to be given over and above the same. In the absence of the wife, we are, however, not inclined to go into any detailed discussion of the law.

7. At the same time, we feel that the claims of the husband and the wife are to be balanced. We, therefore, direct that the husband shall pay to the wife towards maintenance (which now comprehends both the amount awarded under Section 125 of the CrPC and the amount awarded in the matrimonial proceedings) the sum of Rs 1000 p.m commencing from 3-7-1990. The arrears, if any, shall be paid within 8 weeks.

8. This order will be subject to such orders as may be passed at the stage of final disposal of the matrimonial proceedings.

9. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

10. No order as to costs.

Criminal Appeal No. 111 of 1997, decided on January 31, 1997

Sudeep Chaudhary v. Radha Chaudhary .

Factual and Procedural Background

Legal Issues Presented

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant Husband's Arguments

Respondent Wife's Position

Table of Precedents Cited

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

Holding and Implications

Sudeep Chaudhary v. Radha Chaudhary .

Comments