Author: Durga Diwakar, Amity University Patna
Introduction
Maintenance, in the legal terms refers to the financial support provided to one of the parties, involved in a legal dispute, granted through a court order from a jurisdiction that has the authority to do so, and following the execution of a decree related to this matter. Maintenance serves to alleviate the financial burden on the spouse whose economic situation has significantly changed due to a divorce decree.
The primary goal of maintenance is to ensure that the spouse can maintain a standard of living similar to what they had before the separation. It can be awarded during divorce proceeding or after the divorce is finalized, and it typically ends upon the death or remarriage of the person receiving the support. Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is frequently referenced and debated. This provision states that anyone with sufficient means to support themselves cannot be refuse maintenance to their wife, children, or parents if those individuals are unable to support themselves. However, husband who receives maintenance orders from lower courts may not always agree with the decisions made. As a result, they should have a means to express their concerns regarding the ruling. They are entitled to file a revision application in court, as outlined in Section 397 of the code. Recently, the number of revision applications has grown, reflecting a greater awareness and a more positive approach from the judiciary in delivering justice to these parties.
Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023(BNSS) deals with maintenance of wife, parents and children .This section aimed to ensuring that family members who are unable to support themselves financially are provided with the adequate maintenance.
Prior Status of Right of Maintenance
Hindu marriage Act, 1995 and Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 initially dealt with the provisions of granting maintenance. The Hindu Marriage Act was formed in the year 1955 and applies specifically on individuals who Hindus are including Sikh, Jains and Buddhist and persons who came under Section 2 of Hindu marriage Act, 1955. Also children whose either of a parent is a Hindu, Sikh, Jains, or Buddhist and are brought up under the same religion will be also be considered as a Hindu and will be entitled to Maintenance. Under Hindu law, a Hindu male was under an obligation to maintain the following persons:
His wife
Unmarried daughter
Legitimate sons
Illegitimate sons,
Aged parents
Thus only Hindus (the applicability of which could be checked from section 2 of Hindu marriage Act, 1955) are covered under this Act.
From the ancient times under women have been kept at a disadvantaged position which not only weakens their stake in the society but also leads to an unequal treatment with them. The Code of Criminal procedure came into force in the year 1973 and according to section 125 of the code, maintenance is granted to wives, children and parents irrespective to any religion or personal laws. Hence, it has provided for a better status to women by granting rights in a dignified manner.
Obligation to Maintain Wife
Section 24 and 25 of the act address the provisions for pendente lite and permanent maintenance, respectively. In the case of Dr. Kulbhusan v/s Raj Kumari and Anr, the court noted that the amount of maintenance is determined based on the specific facts of each case. It stated that if the court decides to increase or adjust the maintenance amount, such a decision would be justified. The court also ruled that it would be reasonable to grant the wife 25% of the husband’s net salary as maintenance.
According to section 24 of the act, if the court finds it appropriate and is satisfied that either the wife or husband lacks independent income, it can order the respondent to pay maintenance to the petitioner as outlined in this section. This means that a husband can also be the claimant.
Section 25 of the Act, which pertains to permanent alimony, allows the court, upon the respondent’s application to order maintenance either as periodic payments or as a lump sum. In the context, the respondent can be either a wife or a husband. The intention behind interpreting the provision this way is to prevent discrimination, as both spouses are considered equal under the law.
Recently the Delhi High Court in the case of Rani Sethi v/s Sunil Sethi, ordered the wife (respondent) to pay her husband (petitioner) maintenance of Rs 20,000 along with Rs 10,000 for litigation expenses. Dissatisfied with this ruling the wife approached the High Court, where the scope of section 24 of the HMA was examined. It was determined that the purpose this section is to offer support to the spouse who is unable to earn an independent income.
The relevant section of the Act grants both husbands and wives the right to apply to the court for maintenance if they lack an independent source of income and have been entirely dependent on their spouse. However this section cannot be used in situations where a husband, despite being capable to earning, deliberately chooses not to work in order to rely on his wife. In such instances, the husband cannot file for maintenance. This principle was established by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in case of Yashpal Singh Thakur vs Smt. Anjana Rajput, where the husband rendered himself incapable of earning by ceasing to operate his auto rickshaw. Therefore, if a person intentionally makes themselves unable to earn, they forfeit the right to seek maintenance.
Obligation to Maintain Children and Parents
Sections 26 of the Act address the custody, maintenance and education of minor children. The court may issue interim orders as it seems fit and has the authority to revoke, suspended, or modify such order as necessary. The responsibility for maintenance falls on both the father and mother of the child, or either parents as directed by the court. Section 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act 1956, establishes an obligation for Hindu males and females to support their legitimate or illegitimate minor children, as well as their aged or infirm parents. The amount of maintenance is to be determined by the competent court based on several factors, including:
The economic position and status of the parties involved
The reasonable wants and needs of the parties
The dependence of the parties, among others
In the case of Sukhjinder Singh Saini v. Harvinder Kaur, the Delhi High Court made several observations regarding the determination of maintenance for a child:
Both parents have a legal, social and moral responsibility to support their children and ensure the have the best possible standard of living, based on their financial situation.
They are equally required to provide for the best education available.
It was also determined that just because the child resides with the spouse who has a sufficient income to support the child, this cannot be used as a valid reason by the other spouse to avoid their obligation to care for the child’s welfare.
Landmark judgment of Maintenance
Rajnesh v. Neha
Fact of the case
Respondent no.1 wife left their home in January 2023, shortly after their son was born. About eight months later, she filed for interim maintenance under section 125 of the Cr.p.c for himself and their minor son.
The family court granted their interim maintenance for Rs. 15,000 per month from the date of her application, along with the Rs. 5000 per month for the son from the same date, and Rs. 10,000 per month from the date of the Family court’s order until furthers orders were issued in the main petition.
The husband contested the Family court’s decision and filed a petition with the Bombay High Court, but the High Court dismissed his petition, upholding the Family courts judgment on 14.08.2018.
Now the dissatisfied husband has approached the Supreme Court.
Supreme Court’s decisions
The Supreme Court instructed the appellant to pay the overdue interim maintenance within 12 weeks from the date of the judgment. If he fails to do so, the respondent is entitled to enforce the order under section 128 of the CRPC and may pursue other legal options. Both parties must submit an affidavit disclosing their assets and liabilities, after which the court will evaluate the maintenance amount at the interim stage.
Regarding the increase in maintenance for the son, the Supreme Court indicated that the respondent should approach the family court since the current issue was raised by the appellant.
The HMA, 1955 and the DV Act do not specify a date for when maintenance should begin. The only relevant statutory provision is section 125(2) of the Cr.P.C which allows the magistrate to grant maintenance either from the date of the order or from the date of the application. Due to the lack of a consistent approach, there is a significant variation in how family courts across the country handle the timing of maintenance awards.
Conclusion
From the various judgments it can be concluded that section 125 of the Cr.P.C establishes strict measures to ensure compliance with maintenance provisions. It transcends religious barriers that often hinder justice, offering equal protection under the law for everyone, regardless of their faith. The principles of ‘justice’ and ‘equity’ take precedence over religion. While the concept of maintenance may be interpreted differently across various legal frameworks, its fundamental purpose remains to provide support. Therefore, section 125 of the code of criminal procedure aims to allow individuals of different religions to seek alimony in a consistent matter.
FAQS
1. Who can claim under section 125?
Any wife can claim maintenance under section 125(1) (a). A child who is still a minor, as defined by the Indian Majority Act, 1875 is eligible under section 125(1) (b). Additionally, according to section 125(1) (d) if a minor or father is unable to support themselves; they can seek maintenance from their children.
2. What is the nature of proceeding under section 125 CrPC?
Is is important to note that the proceeding under section 125 are civil in nature.
3. Is section 125 Cr.P.C a summary trial?
Yes, trials conducted under section 125 of the Code of the Criminal Procedure 1973, are considered summary trials.
References
https://jsrohilla.in/maintenance-of-wife-and-children-under-section-144-bnss/
https://blog.ipleaders.in/concept-of-maintenance-in-hindu-marriage-act-1955/
https://lawbhoomi.com/rajnesh-v-neha/#Introduction
https://blog.ipleaders.in/analysis-scope-revision-section-125-crpc/#Introduction
