Rajesh Kumar PandeyPrayagraj: Allahabad High Court observed that once a mother was granted maintenance from her son under section 125 of CrPC, she cannot subsequently seek maintenance from her stepson.The court’s Jul 14 order said that after receiving maintenance from her son, the mother is can maintain herself, hence, is not entitled to any subsequent maintenance order in her favour.The court, however, clarified that if there are two or more persons under obligation to maintain the applicant and claimant approaches court, it is the court’s duty to decide from whom and to what extent maintenance is to be made payable.Justice Lakshmi Kant Shukla dismissed a criminal revision filed by a woman seeking modification of a family court order to also hold her stepson liable for maintenance, even though her son had already been directed to pay her Rs 8,000 per month.It was her stance that the trial court had wrongly fastened liability to pay maintenance solely on the son and erred in imposing no liability on her stepson.In essence, her counsel argued that both sons ought to have been directed to pay maintenance.While opposing the plea, the counsel appearing for state and the stepson submitted that, in the presence of her son, who has sufficient means to maintain his mother, the stepson cannot be held liable for the same.Against the backdrop of these submissions, the court perused section 125 CrPC to note that while considering a claim for maintenance by parents, the court has to determine relationship between the parties, whether the parent is unable to maintain herself, and whether the person from whom maintenance is claimed has sufficient means to provide such maintenance.Court said the revisionist was biological mother of one son and stepmother of another and though she may have been unable to maintain herself when she initially filed the maintenance application, the family court had directed her son to pay maintenanceAfter that order, circumstances changed, and now the mother was capable of maintaining herself, as she is getting maintenance from her biological son.“Now, the revisionist is capable of maintaining herself with maintenance amount from her son,” the court said, adding that a person’s inability to maintain himself/herself ceases upon the court’s order directing payment of maintenance. The person in whose favour the maintenance order is passed cannot claim another maintenance from another person, the court noted.In view of this, finding no reason to interfere, the high court dismissed the revision petition. It was, however, also observed that the plea had been filed solely with the intention of harassing the stepson, without any substantive legal basis.
