Shahada Khatoon and Ors Vs Amjad Ali and Ors - Citation 667712 - Court Judgment - LegalCrystal

 

6/28/2019

Shahada Khatoon and ors Vs Amjad Ali and ors - Citation 667712 - Court Judgment | LegalCrystal

Shahada Khatoon and ors. Vs. Amjad Ali and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation Subject

Family;Criminal

Court

Supreme Court of India

legalcrystal.com/667712

Decided On  Apr-07-1999 Case Number

Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 1996

Judge

G.B. Pattanaik and; M.B. Shah, JJ.

Reported in 2000(1)ALD(Cri)305; 1999CriLJ5060; I(2000)DMC313SC; JT1999(10)SC260; 2000(1)KLT696(SC); 2000(2)MPHT1; 1999(2)MPLJ448; 1999(II)OLR(SC)333; (1999)5SCC672  Acts

Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Sections 125(3)

 Appellant

Shahada Khatoon and ors.

Respondent  Amjad Ali and ors. Excerpt:   Excerpt: - maxims falsus in uno falsus in omnibus: [s.b.sinha & dr.mukundakam sharma,jj] held, it has no application in india.indian evidence act, 1872 section 3: [s.b.sinha & dr.mukundakam sharma,jj] doctrine falsus in uno falsus in omnibus held, it has no application in india.indian penal code, 1890 sections 300 & 34: murder - common intention - appellants along with three others allegedly  assaulted deceased - high court affirmed judgment of conviction of appellant while giving benefit of  doubt to three other accused - benefit of doubt given only because testimonies of witnesses in regard to place of assault on person of deceased were not corroborated by medical evidence held, high court failed to notice that all the five accused persons were charged of having common object of causing murder..........non-payment there has been a breach of the order and therefore the magistrate would  be entitled to impose sentence on such a person continuing him in custody until payment is made.  we are unable to accept this contention co ntention of the learned coun counsel sel for the appellants. the language of subsection (3) of section 125 is quite clear and it circumscribes the power of the magistrate to impose imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until the payment, if sooner made. this power of the magistrate cannot be enlarged and therefore, the only remedy would be after expiry of  one month, for breach of non-compliance of the order of the magistrate the wife can approach again to the magistrate for similar relief. by no stretch of imagination the magistrate can be permitted to impose sentence.....

https://www.legalcrystal.com/case/667712/shahada-khatoon-ors-vs-amjad-ali

1/3

 

6/28/2019

Shahada Khatoon and ors Vs Amjad Ali and ors - Citation 667712 - Court Judgment | LegalCrystal

Download this to PDF - Download this to PDF

Supreme Court Judgement 2019 -

Ad   free.propdfconverter.com

legalcrystal.com

Encroachment - Court Supreme Court of India -...

Supreme Court of India Court - Ap

legalcrystal.com

legalcrystal.com

Supreme Court Judgement 2019 - Page 2 -...

Court Karnataka - Recent Judgme

legalcrystal.com

legalcrystal.com

1940 Pc 160 - Judgments

Thalapallam V State of Kerala - Ju

legalcrystal.com

legalcrystal.com

High Water - Court Kerala - Page 3 - Judgments

Calculation of Notice Period Unde

legalcrystal.com

legalcrystal.com

Supreme Court Judgement 1995 - Judgments

Supreme Court of India Court - M

legalcrystal.com

legalcrystal.com

Judgment:  Judgment:  ORDER  1. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the learned single Judge of the Patna High Court correctly interpreted Sub-section (3) of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. by directing that the Magistrate can only sentence for a period of one month or until payment, if sooner made. The learned Counsel for the appellants contends that the liability of the husband arising out of an order passed under Section 125 to make payment of maintenance is a continuing one and on account of  non-payment there has been a breach of the order and therefore the Magistrate would be entitled to impose sentence on such a person continuing him in custody until payment is made. We are unable to accept this contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants. The language of Sub-section (3) of  Section 125 is quite clear and it circumscribes the power of the Magistrate to impose imprisonment for a term which may extend to one month or until the payment, if sooner made. This power of the Magistrate cannot be enlarged and therefore, the only remedy would be after expiry of one month, for breach of non-compliance of the order of the Magistrate the wife can approach again to the Magistrate for similar relief. By no stretch of imagination the Magistrate can be permitted to impose sentence for more than one month. In that view of the matter the High Court was fully justified in passing the impugned order and we see no infirmity in the said order to be interfered with by this Court. The appeal accordingly fails and is dismissed.

 

https://www.legalcrystal.com/case/667712/shahada-khatoon-ors-vs-amjad-ali

2/3

 

6/28/2019

Shahada Khatoon and ors Vs Amjad Ali and ors - Citation 667712 - Court Judgment | LegalCrystal

https://www.legalcrystal.com/case/667712/shahada-khatoon-ors-vs-amjad-ali

3/3