Ahalya Bariha Alias Barihani (Smt.) v. Chhelia Padhan : 1992 Cri.L.J. 493 : 1992 (1) DMC 158 : 1992 (1) HLR 604 : 1992 (2) CCR 1670 : 1991 (72) CulLT 476 : 1992 (5) OCR 308 : 1992 (30 RCR(Cri) 11 : 1992 CivCC 121 : 1991 LRC Online 5 (Ori)
Section 125-Denial of maintenance to illegitimate child-Revision-Where maintenance is claimed for an illegitimate child from an alleged father, it is not enough that defendant would have been the father, but court has to find out that in all reasonability no one else could have been the father-Absence of proof of paternity of child- No Perversity in impugned order-Petition dismissed.
Held : Section 125 aims not to punish for the past, but to prevent future vagrancy by compelling those who are capable, to support those who are unable to support themselves and have a moral claim to support. (See AIR 1963 SC 1521: (1963 (2) Cri LJ 413) Mst. Jagir Kaur v. Jaswant Singh. While deciding the case of entitlement of a child, paternity and not legitimacy has to be seen. Where maintenance is claimed for an illegitimate child from an alleged father, it is not enough that the defendant would have been the father, but the Court has to find out that in all reasonability no one else could have been the father. The evidence in this case falls short of that requirement. The so-called decisions of the village committee on which strong reliance has been placed is of no assistance to the petitioner, because it is not shown that the opposite party had conceded to be bound by it. On the other hand, the evidence of the witnesses is discrepant on the question whether he was at all present when the alleged decisions were taken. While some assert his presence, others accept his absence. The substance of decisions of the committee has been described differently by the witnesses. This aspect has been highlighted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. I find no perversity in the conclusions or reasonings.