Presumption of constitutionality controls where a court strikes down a statute without a properly raised constitutional challenge.

A statutory provision is presumed constitutional and cannot be struck down unless the validity challenge is properly raised and the affected constitutional authority is given notice. Here, the High Court went beyond the issues before it by declaring Section 125(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure unconstitutional without the challenge having been duly placed in issue. The Supreme Court set aside that declaration and restored the revision for fresh decision on the merits, holding that constitutional invalidity could not be upheld on an inadequately raised challenge.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court could declare Section 125(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure unconstitutional and sustain the maintenance order on that basis.

Analysis: Statutory provisions carry a presumption of constitutionality and are not to be struck down unless the challenge is properly raised and the affected constitutional authority is put on notice. The constitutional validity of Section 125(2) had not been properly placed in issue, and the High Court's emphasis on unconstitutionality went beyond what could be decided in the proceeding. In these circumstances, the impugned judgment could not stand.

Conclusion: The High Court's declaration that Section 125(2) was unconstitutional was set aside, and the revision was restored for fresh decision on merits.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory provision cannot be invalidated on constitutional grounds unless the challenge is properly raised and the requisite notice is given; statutes are presumed to be constitutional until so challenged and decided.

---