In Anju Garg and Anr Vs Deepak Kumar Garg, the Supreme Court of India examined whether a wife is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS) despite adverse findings by lower courts.
The appellants (wife and son) challenged the denial of maintenance to the wife by the Family Court and the High Court. The Court observed that the husband not only neglected his duty but also made baseless allegations regarding the wife’s character, which justified her living separately.
Moreover, the Court emphasised that maintenance provisions serve a social justice function. Therefore, once neglect and inability to maintain oneself are established, courts must grant relief.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the erroneous findings of lower courts and granted maintenance to the wife.
“9. Section 125 of Cr.P.C. was conceived to ameliorate the agony, anguish and financial suffering of a woman who is required to leave the matrimonial home, so that some suitable arrangements could be made to enable her to sustain herself and the children.”
“10. It is the sacrosanct duty of the husband to provide financial support to the wife and to the minor children. The husband is required to earn money even by physical labour, if he is an able-bodied, and could not avoid his obligation, except on the legally permissible grounds mentioned in the statute.”
“11. She had clearly stated as to how she was harassed and subjected to cruelty by the respondent, which had constrained her to leave the matrimonial home along with her children, and as to how the respondent had failed and neglected to maintain her and her children. She had also proved by producing the documentary evidence that her father had paid money to the respondent from time to time to help the respondent for his business. Even if the allegations of demand of dowry by the respondent were not believed, there was enough evidence to believe that money was being paid to the respondent by the father of the appellant-wife, which substantiated her allegation that the respondent was demanding money from her father and was subjecting her to harassment.”
“13. The respondent being an able- bodied, he is obliged to earn by legitimate means and maintain his wife and the minor child. Having regard to the evidence of the appellant-wife before the Family Court, and having regard to the other evidence on record, the Court has no hesitation in holding that though the respondent had sufficient source of income and was able-bodied, had failed and neglected to maintain the appellants.”
Decision
The Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal and held that the wife was entitled to maintenance.
Accordingly:
- The Court awarded ₹10,000 per month as maintenance to the wife.
- This amount was in addition to ₹6,000 per month already granted to the son.
- The maintenance was made payable from the date of filing of the petition.
- The Court also directed the husband to clear arrears within 8 weeks.
Thus, the Court corrected the perverse findings of the Family Court and High Court and reinforced the protective intent of maintenance law.
Citation :
Other Sources :
Index of Maintenance Judgements under Sec 125 CrPC is here.
Related Legal Concepts
Explore related stages and concepts in criminal procedure:
- Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC (Section 144 BNSS)
- Social Justice Jurisprudence in Family Law
- Cruelty as Ground for Separate Residence
- Burden of Proof in Maintenance Cases
- Obligation of Able-Bodied Husband to Maintain Wife
Key Contributor :
Mrs. Suprajaa Rajan B.Com., LL.B., LL.M.
+91-9606345150
