Minor's maintenance claim under Section 125 CrPC survives flaw in who filed it, rules Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Jabalpur Bench, has set aside a Family Court order that dismissed a minor daughter's application for interim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure solely because the application had been filed through her maternal grandmother, who the Family Court held was not her recognised legal guardian. Miss Siddhi Chaurasiya had sought maintenance from her father, Sailendra Chaurasiya, with her maternal grandmother acting as her 'next friend' in the proceedings. The High Court held that a minor child's right to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC is an independent statutory entitlement belonging to the child, not one derived from or contingent on the status of whoever represents the child, or on any arrangement or compromise between the parents.

It relied on precedent holding that a child's maintenance right cannot be bargained away even by a settlement between the parents, reasoning that if parents cannot extinguish the right by agreement, a mere irregularity in the channel through which the claim is presented cannot defeat it either. The Court therefore set aside the dismissal and directed the Family Court to decide the maintenance application afresh on its merits, treating the question of who properly represents the child as separate from whether the child is entitled to maintenance at all. This is a High Court ruling binding within Madhya Pradesh, not a Supreme Court precedent.