The Delhi High Court on Thursday held that, once a petition under section 125 CrPC has been pronounced, a subsequent petition cannot be entertained, arising out of the same dispute as the earlier one under section 125 CrPC. arising out of the issues already settled in the petition filed.
A bench of Justice Swaran Kanta Sharma was considering the revision petition challenging the order passed by the Family Court, which had dismissed the maintenance application filed by the petitioner on the ground of Corres Judicata.
In this case, the marriage was solemnized between Petitioner No.1 and Respondent No.1. Since the time of the separation, the parties have been involved in several lawsuits. Out of which one such case was registered under section 125 of CrPC.
The second petition was filed by the petitioner under section 125 of CrPC. To direct the respondent to pay Rs. 20,000/- per month in favor of the petitioner no. 1 and also to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- per month in favor of the petitioner no.
The issue of consideration before the bench was:
However, the said case was dismissed by judicial decision on the ground that before filing the said petition, the petitioner along with his two children filed a petition under section 125 of CrPC before the court of ACJM, Gurgaon, Haryana. Had it.
Where once a favorable order has been passed on the merits u/s 125 Cr.P.C, can a subsequent petition u/s 125 Cr.P.C be filed?
The bench observed that “a petition under section 125 of CrPC, by virtue of its universal applicability, shall be covered by the principle of justice. Once a petition has been adjudicated under section 125 of the CrPC, favorably by a court of competent jurisdiction on the merits, a subsequent petition cannot be preferred which is a similar dispute having similar circumstances and grounds. as laid down in the petition filed earlier under section 125 CrPC.
The High Court observed that the doctrine of res judicata evolved to prevent plurality of litigation in respect of a single issue and eliminates the issue of having a final adjudication ensuring finality in litigation. This ensures abuse of the process of law and deprives a litigant of access to the courts of repeatedly aggravating issues which have become final between the parties after the court of law has decided on the basis of merit.
In view of the above, the High Court dismissed the petition.