Post Views: 57
Minoti Subhash Anand Vs Subhash Manoharlal Anand on 10 December, 2015
Yogesh @ Sachin Jagdish Joshi Vs State of Maharashtra on 28 April, 2008
The Apex Court had held that,
“15. It is trite that the words “not sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused” appearing in the Section postulate exercise of judicial mind on the part of the Judge to the facts of the case in order to determine whether a case for trial has been made out by the prosecution. However, in assessing this fact, the Judge has the power to sift and weigh the material for the limited purpose of finding out whether or not a prima facie case against the accused has been made out. The test to determine a prima facie case depends upon the facts of each case and in this regard it is neither feasible nor desirable to lay down a rule of universal application. By and large, however, if two views are equally possible and the Judge is satisfied that the evidence produced before him gives rise to suspicion only as distinguished from grave suspicion, he will be fully within his right to discharge the accused. At this stage, he is not to see as to whether the trial will end in conviction or not. The broad test to be applied is whether the materials on record, if unrebutted, makes a conviction reasonably possible.”
Citations:
Indiankanoon.org link:
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Santosh Kumar Vs State of Karnataka on 09 October, 2019
This judgment from High Court of Karnataka says,
“it is incumbent on the Court to state reasons with reference to the material on record on which reliance is placed by the Court to formulate an opinion, to reject the application for discharge”.
Citations:
Indiankanoon.org link:
Earlier Judgment is available here.
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
UGC Notification Reg. Refund of Fees and Non-Retention of Original Certificates
Here are UGC Notifications Reg.:Refund of Fees and Non-Retention of Original Certificates Published on 02-11-2018
Original Source: https://www.ugc.ac.in/ugc_notices.aspx?id=2176
Earlier notification regarding Refund of Fees Published on 12-01-2016
Original Source: https://www.ugc.ac.in/ugc_notices.aspx?id=1270
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
Activities for Law Students
Hope this assortment helps you guys pick and plan something to keep the folks engaged
English Training
2-3 weeks of daily classes on listening, writing and reading, in an effort to improve vocabulary and legal drafting skils
Subject Discussion
Weekly sessions to discuss/debate/brainstorm topics from Class Subjects
Public Interest Litigation
Motivate to get involved into PIL space of various areas of Law.
Field Trips to
– Special Children School
–
Potluck Event
A bonding and team building exercise
Movie Shows
Another bonding and team building exercise
A list is here.
Enactment of Plays/Books/Movie scenes
– Merchant of Venice.
– Trials of Gandhi
Mock Trials
https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/murder-by-poisoning-is-conviction-possible-even-without-detecting-poison-in-the-body-of-the-deceased-149291
Awards for Performance
Best Teacher Award based on student voting.
In-memory (of parents or elders) Awards
Movies for Law Students and…
Telugu
Sudigundaalu
Ashwathama
Srava Sandhya
Tamil
Manithan
Hindi
Pink
Jolly LLB
Jolly LLB 2
Aitraaz
Shourya
Mulk
https://www.primevideo.com/detail/Dhananjoy/0OWLNAT6SAFOS2BPIC0KCNO7J1
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhananjoy_Chatterjee
English
Clock work orange
12 angry men
My cousine Vinny ( extemly funny & creative)
Philadelphia ( Tom Hanks & denzil – Jo lost due to HIV )
To kill a mockingbird ( child role )
Movie Lists
https://m.imdb.com/list/ls026258815/
https://www.filmykeeday.com/best-movies-on-courtroom-drama/
Maintenance Judgments
Maintenance judgments by Enactment
Maintenance and Alimony Judgments under Hindu Marriage Act 1955 here.
Maintenance Judgments under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956 here.
Maintenance Judgments under Section 125 CrPC [Section 144 BNSS] here.
Maintenance Judgments under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 here.
Maintenance for Limited Time Period here.
Maintenance after Mutual Consent Divorce here.
Agreements against Public Policy are Void here.
A SPECIAL FOCUS ON IMPLEMENTATION OF Rajnesh Vs Neha AFFIDAVIT
A 2-judge bench of Supreme Court passed guidelines in Rajnesh Vs Neha on how to handle multiple maintenance litigation here.
- Telangana High Court gave a wonderful order here, confirming that any order passed by Trial Courts, without calling for the Income affidavits is void ab initio and therefore is liable to set aside and matters will be remanded back to the same Trial Courts for fresh adjudication.
- Then another 2-judge bench of Apex Court has to Order re-circulation of above judgment in Aditi Sharma Vs Jitesh Sharma, because the Trial Court Judges stopped following Supreme Court judgement here. Exactly after 3 long years!!!
- There are other High Courts which set aside the trial Court orders for the singular reason that they did not follow Rajnesh Vs Neha. Check them out here.
- Calcutta HC in Nripendra Chandra Mahanta Vs Pramila Mahanta on 08 Feb 2023
- Allahabad HC in Parul Tyagi Vs Gaurav Tyagi on 04 Aug 2023
- Telangana HC in Chinta Vamshi Vs State of Telangana and Anr on 16 Oct 2023
- Kerala HC in Rijas MT Vs Hafseena M on 15 Nov 2023
- Patna HC in Gitanjali Devi Vs State of Bihar and Anr on 02 Dec 2023
- Karnataka HC in Darshanik M M Vs Poornima A on 04 Dec 2023
- MP HC in Balram Dixit Vs Kiran Dixit and Anr on 17 Jan 2024
- It seems AP High Court is hell bent not to follow Rajnesh Vs Neha… and passed this perverse order here with a trivial reason. Karma!
- AP HC following my success story in Sreekanth Vs Nalini in Meegada Venu Gopala Rao Vs Meegada Usha Rani and Ors on 10 Jul 2024. Happy!!!
- AP HC in Kalavakuru Srinivas Kumar Reddy Vs Kalavakuru @ Revuru Sujatha and Ors on 05 Feb 2025 [My client’s case]
- Orissa HC in Nabaghana Sahoo Vs Smruti Prava Sahoo and Anr on 11 Feb 2025 [neither of the parties has filed the disclosure affidavit as mandated in Rajnesh]
- Kerala HC in Ratheesh Vs Sreelakshmi and Ors on 14 Mar 2025 (Even to dispose Interim Maintenance Applications, call for affidavits)
- Patna HC in Ravi Prakash Saxena Vs Priyanka Rani on 04 Sep 2025 [Remanded case back to the same Trial Courts for fresh adjudication]
- Madras HC in N.Santhosh Kumar Vs S.Priyadarshini on 25 Oct 2025 [Lied on the Income Affidavit, so interim maintenance reduced]
A 2-judge bench of Supreme Court recorded the various observations of the Delhi High Court in Parvin Kumar Jain Vs Anju Jain here, where by Delhi High Court flagged the following tendencies of parties in filing their Income Affidavits.
- Instances of the appellant’s deliberate attempts to mislead the judicial process
- Withheld critical financial documents
- Selectively disclosed information to conceal the full extent of his wealth
- False representations by the appellant regarding his property and income
- Demonstrated a pattern of deliberate suppression of material facts and assets
- Allahabad HC in Atul Kumar Bajpai Vs State of UP and Anr on 17 Sep 2025 held that Perjury applications alleging false evidence/affidavit must be first Disposed
MASTER SITEMAP here.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) – Maintenance Law & Judgments in India
Maintenance refers to financial support provided by one person to another who is unable to maintain themselves, typically in matrimonial or family relationships. Under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), courts can order a person with sufficient means to provide maintenance to his wife, children, or parents if he neglects or refuses to support them.
The following persons can seek maintenance under the law:
- Wife, including a divorced woman who has not remarried
- Minor children unable to maintain themselves
- Adult children suffering from disability or illness
- Parents who cannot support themselves
The objective of the provision is to prevent destitution and vagrancy by ensuring financial support for dependents.
To claim maintenance, the applicant generally needs to show:
- A valid marital or legal relationship
- Neglect or refusal to maintain by the respondent
- The applicant is unable to maintain themselves
- The respondent has sufficient financial means
Courts evaluate these factors based on evidence and circumstances of each case.
Yes. Courts have clarified that mere qualification or ability to earn is not enough to deny maintenance. What matters is whether the person is actually earning enough to maintain a reasonable standard of living comparable to that enjoyed during the marriage.
Courts determine the quantum of maintenance based on several factors, including:
- Income and financial capacity of the respondent
- Lifestyle and standard of living during marriage
- Needs of the claimant and dependents
- Educational and employment status of the parties
- Reasonable expenses for food, clothing, and shelter
The goal is to ensure the dependent spouse can maintain a dignified standard of living.
Yes. Courts can grant interim maintenance to provide immediate financial support during ongoing proceedings. Applications for interim maintenance are expected to be decided expeditiously, ensuring the claimant is not left without support while the case continues.
Maintenance may be refused if the wife:
- Is living in adultery
- Refuses to live with her husband without sufficient reason
- Lives separately by mutual consent
- Has sufficient independent income to maintain herself
These exceptions are provided under Section 125(4) CrPC.
Yes. Under Section 125 CrPC, parents who are unable to maintain themselves have the legal right to claim maintenance from their children. Courts treat this obligation as a moral and legal duty of children toward their parents.
Yes. A divorced wife who has not remarried can claim maintenance if she cannot support herself. Courts have repeatedly recognized that divorce does not extinguish the right to maintenance where financial dependence continues.
Courts increasingly require both parties to file affidavits disclosing income, assets, and liabilities, including bank statements, tax returns, and property details. This ensures fair determination of maintenance and prevents concealment of income.
Maintenance provisions are social welfare measures intended to prevent financial hardship and ensure that dependents such as spouses, children, and parents are not left destitute due to neglect or abandonment.
Yes. With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, the provision corresponding to Section 125 CrPC has been incorporated as Section 144 BNSS, while retaining the same core principles governing maintenance claims.
Neeta Rakesh Jain Vs Rakesh Jeetmal Jain on 20 July, 2010
Apex Court held in this decision u/s 23 of Hindu Marriage Act that, Court has to consider the petitioner’s own income and the income of the respondent before granting Interim Maintenance to application.
From Para 8,
8. Section 24 thus provides that in any proceeding under the Act, the spouse who has no independent income sufficient for her or his support may apply to the court to direct the respondent to pay the monthly maintenance as the court may think reasonable, regard being had to the petitioner’s own income and the income of the respondent. The very language in which Section is couched indicates that wide discretion has been conferred on the court in the matter of an order for interim maintenance. Although the discretion conferred on the court is wide, the Section provides guideline inasmuch as while fixing the interim maintenance the court has to give due regard to the income of the respondent and the petitioner’s own income. In other words, in the matter of making an order for interim maintenance, the discretion of the court must be guided by the criterion provided in the Section, namely, the means of the parties and also after taking into account incidental and other relevant factors like social status; the background from which both the parties come from and the economical dependence of the petitioner. Since an order for interim maintenance by its very nature is temporary, a detailed and elaborate exercise by the court may not be necessary, but, at the same time, the court has got to take all the relevant factors into account and arrive at a proper amount having regard to the factors which are mentioned in the statute.
Final Straw:
The cost of the appeal is burdened at Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) on the husband to be paid to the appellant within one month from today.
Citations: 2010 SCR 8 505, 2010 AIR SC 3540, 2010 SCC 12 242, 2010 SCALE 7 201,
Indiankanoon.org link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/9474/
Reproduced in accordance with Section 52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, lobis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court and District Court Websites such as ecourts.gov.in
