Important Case Law on Family Courts Act & CrPC
| Party Name | Ratio |
|---|---|
| K.A. Abdul Jaleel Vs. T.A. Shahida, AIR 2003 SC 2525 | Provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1984 should be construed liberally. It is well settled that the jurisdiction of a specially created court for dispute resolution should be interpreted broadly. A restricted meaning to Explanation (c) of Section 7(1) of the Act would defeat the purpose of Family Courts. |
| Badshah Vs. Urmila Badshah Godse & Another, (2014) 1 SCC 188 | Nature of provisions u/s 125 CrPC is social justice legislation. Distinct approach should be adopted while dealing with cases u/s 125 CrPC. Drift in approach from "adversarial" litigation to social context adjudication is needed. |
| Dwarika Prasad Satpathi Vs. Bidyut Prava Dixit, AIR 1999 SC 3348 | Proceeding u/s 125 CrPC is summary in nature and intended to provide speedy remedy to wife. |
| Vijay Kumar Prasad Vs. State of Bihar, (2004) 5 SCC 196 | The jurisdiction of magistrate under chapter IX CrPC is not strictly a criminal jurisdiction. Proceedings u/s 125 CrPC are civil in nature. |
| Savitri Vs. Govind Singh Rawat, (1985) 4 SCC 337 | The jurisdiction of magistrate under chapter IX CrPC is not strictly a criminal jurisdiction. Proceedings u/s 125 CrPC are civil in nature. |
| Shantha Vs. B.G. Shivananjappa, (2005) 4 SCC 468 | Section 125 CrPC is a measure of social legislation and is to be construed liberally for the welfare and benefit of the wife & children. |
| Savitaben Vs. State of Gujarat, (2005) 3 SCC 636 | Section 125 CrPC is a measure of social legislation and is to be construed liberally for the welfare and benefit of the wife & children. |
| Nagendrappa Natikar Vs. Neelamma, AIR 2013 SC 1541 | Proceeding u/s 125 CrPC is summary in nature and intended to provide speedy remedy to wife. |