The Supreme Court, in Rina Kumari @ Rina Devi @ Reena vs. Dinesh Kumar Mahto @ Dinesh Kumar Mahato and Anr [2025 INSC 55], clarified that proceedings under Section 125 of the CrPC are essentially civil in nature.
Although these cases are filed under criminal procedural laws—formerly Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and now Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)—they serve as a speedy remedy for dependents. The primary goal is to ensure social justice and prevent destitution rather than to punish an individual for a crime.
Objectives and Enforcement
The main objective is to provide financial support to wives, children, and parents who cannot maintain themselves. It treats the provision of maintenance as a social duty rather than the resolution of a criminal offense.
While these cases are heard in a Magistrate’s court, the enforcement of maintenance orders functions similarly to a civil court’s money decree. This allows for the attachment of property to satisfy the amount owed.
Non-payment of maintenance does not immediately categorize a person as a criminal. Instead, the legal process focuses on recovering the “debt.” While penalties (including imprisonment) exist for willful default, they are viewed as a means of enforcing the recovery of dues rather than punishment for a traditional crime.
