SADHU SINGH vs SEHAJDEEP SINGH — CRR(F)/756/2026

Disposed: --DISMISSED on 13th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: PHHC010774932026

Filing Number

CRR(F)/36054/2026

Filing Date

06-May-2026

Registration No

CRR(F)/756/2026

Registration Date

08-May-2026

Judge

Ms. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal

Coram

Ms. Justice Shalini Singh Nagpal

Bench Type

Single

Category

99 ( 945 )

Sub-Category

37.16 - CRL.REV. AGAINST ORD. OF FAMILY COURT. U/S 125 ( 280 )

Judicial Branch

CRIMINAL BRANCH

Decision Date

13-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SADHU SINGH

    Adv. SUMEETPAL SINGH SIDHU

  2. 2.SADHU SINGH

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SEHAJDEEP SINGH

  2. 2.SADHU SINGH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-May-2026

    Ms. Justice Shalini Singh NagpalView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the father's petition challenging a Family Court order awarding ₹2,500/month maintenance to his 3-year-old son. The court held that a father's obligation to maintain his minor child is primary, absolute, and non-negotiable, and cannot be extinguished by prior settlement payments made to the mother for her alimony. The ₹1,40,000 paid during divorce proceedings was for the mother's maintenance alone, not the child's, and the father's claims of being unwell and impoverished lacked credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRR(F)/756/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed the father's petition challenging a Family Court order awarding ₹2,500/month maintenance to his 3-year-old son. The court held that a father's obligation to maintain his minor child is primary, absolute, and non-negotiable, and cannot be extinguished by prior settlement payments made to the mother for her alimony. The ₹1,40,000 paid during divorce proceedings was for the mother's maintenance alone, not the child's, and the father's claims of being unwell and impoverished lacked credible evidence. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case