web analytics

Menu

Skip to content
Shades of Knife
  • Home
  • True Colors of a Vile Wife
  • Need Inspiration?
  • Blog Updates
  • SOK Gallery
  • Vile News Reporter
  • About Me
  • Contact Me

Shades of Knife

True Colors of a Vile Wife

Tag: BNSS Sec 144 – Order for maintenance of wives children and parents

Anju Garg and Anr Vs Deepak Kumar Garg on 28 Sep 2022 – Judgement Summary

Posted on April 4 by Suprajaa Rajan

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.


Anju Garg and Anr Vs Deepak Kumar Garg on 28 Sep 2022

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


Posted in Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision Anju Garg and Anr Vs Deepak Kumar Garg BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 - Order for Maintenance of Wives Children and Parents | Leave a comment

How to Defend Excessive Maintenance Claims in Matrimonial Cases

Posted on March 8 by Suprajaa Rajan

Maintenance disputes are among the most contested aspects of matrimonial litigation. Frequently, one spouse may claim maintenance that is significantly higher than the actual financial capacity of the other spouse. In such situations, it becomes essential to understand how the law evaluates maintenance claims and what legal strategies can be used to challenge excessive demands.

Therefore, defending an exaggerated maintenance claim requires a careful examination of financial records, legal principles, and factual circumstances. This article explains the legal framework governing maintenance in India and the practical strategies that can be used to contest excessive claims before the court.

Understanding Maintenance Under Indian Law

Maintenance is intended to provide financial support to a spouse who lacks sufficient means for sustenance. However, the objective of maintenance law is not to punish one spouse or provide an unjust enrichment to the other.

In India, maintenance may be claimed under several legal provisions, including:

  • Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure

  • Section 24 and Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act

  • Section 20 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act

These provisions aim to ensure that a financially dependent spouse is able to maintain a reasonable standard of living.

However, courts also recognise that maintenance must be proportionate to the paying spouse’s income and financial obligations.

Principles Considered by Courts While Determining Maintenance

Before awarding maintenance, courts usually evaluate several factors. These factors help ensure that the amount awarded is fair and balanced.

Some important considerations include:

  • Actual income of both spouses

  • Standard of living during the marriage

  • Financial liabilities of the respondent

  • Employment and earning capacity of the claimant

  • Number of dependents

  • Educational qualifications and work experience of the spouse claiming maintenance

The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha laid down detailed guidelines for determining maintenance, including mandatory disclosure of assets and liabilities by both parties.

These guidelines aim to prevent exaggerated or misleading maintenance claims.

Step 1: Demand Full Financial Disclosure

First and foremost, the respondent should insist on complete financial disclosure by the claimant spouse.

This may include:

  • Income tax returns

  • Bank statements

  • Salary slips

  • Investment records

  • Details of movable and immovable property

If the claimant is employed or earning independently, these records can significantly weaken an inflated maintenance claim.

Moreover, courts are increasingly strict about accurate disclosure of financial information.

Step 2: Challenge Incorrect Income Allegations

In many cases, the claimant spouse may overstate the respondent’s income. For example, allegations may be made that the respondent earns large amounts through business or undisclosed sources.

However, such allegations must be supported by documentary evidence.

Therefore, the respondent should submit:

  • Income tax returns

  • Salary certificates

  • Business financial statements

  • Loan repayment records

These documents help the court determine the actual earning capacity of the respondent.

Step 3: Highlight Financial Liabilities

Another important strategy is to demonstrate the existing financial responsibilities of the respondent.

Courts consider various liabilities such as:

  • Housing loans or personal loans

  • Responsibility for elderly parents

  • Educational expenses of children

  • Medical expenses of dependents

When these obligations are properly documented, the court may reduce the maintenance amount to a reasonable level.

Step 4: Show the Claimant’s Earning Capacity

Maintenance is generally awarded when the spouse is unable to maintain herself or himself independently. However, if the claimant is educated, professionally qualified, or capable of earning, courts may reduce or deny excessive maintenance claims.

For instance, if the claimant has:

  • Professional qualifications

  • Prior employment history

  • Independent income sources

the court may conclude that the claimant has the capacity to support themselves partially or fully.

Consequently, exaggerated maintenance demands may be rejected.

Step 5: Point Out Lifestyle Exaggeration

Sometimes, the claimant may attempt to justify a high maintenance demand by claiming an extremely luxurious lifestyle during marriage.

However, the court will examine whether such claims are realistic and supported by evidence.

Therefore, the respondent should present evidence such as:

  • Actual household expenses

  • Standard living conditions during marriage

  • Financial limitations faced during the relationship

This helps demonstrate that the maintenance claim is inflated beyond reality.

Step 6: Seek Interim Relief Modification

If the court has already granted interim maintenance, the respondent may apply for modification if the amount is unreasonable.

Modification may be sought when:

  • Financial circumstances change

  • New evidence regarding income emerges

  • The claimant conceals financial information

Courts may revise interim maintenance orders to ensure fairness.

Step 7: Expose Suppression of Income or Assets

In some cases, the claimant spouse may hide employment or assets while claiming maintenance.

If evidence of such concealment is produced, courts may:

  • Reduce the maintenance amount

  • Dismiss the claim

  • Impose costs

Therefore, conducting proper financial investigation and documentation becomes crucial.

Importance of Documentation in Maintenance Defence

Defending excessive maintenance claims largely depends on documentary evidence. Oral allegations rarely carry much weight unless supported by records.

Important documents include:

  • Income tax returns

  • Salary certificates

  • Bank statements

  • Loan documents

  • Property records

  • Employment history of the claimant spouse

When these records are properly presented, they provide the court with a realistic picture of the financial situation of both parties.

Conclusion

Maintenance laws aim to protect financially dependent spouses. However, they are not meant to enable unreasonable or inflated financial demands. Therefore, defending excessive maintenance claims requires a structured legal approach, accurate financial disclosure, and strategic presentation of evidence.

By demonstrating the true income, financial liabilities, and earning capacity of both spouses, the respondent can ensure that the court determines a fair and reasonable maintenance amount.

Ultimately, courts strive to strike a balance between financial support and fairness, ensuring that maintenance orders reflect genuine need rather than exaggerated claims.


Index of Legal Strategies and Defence is here.


Key Contributor :

Mrs. Suprajaa Rajan B.Com., LL.B., LL.M.

+91-9606345150


Posted in Legal Procedure | Tagged BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents legal strategy and defence Maintenance Defence Matrimonial Criminal Law Matrimonial dispute matrimonial offences | Leave a comment

Jagdamba Trivedi Vs Neha Trivedi on 18 Jan 2021

Posted on October 19, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A good judgment from a single judge of High Court of Chhattisgarh Judgment explaining how important it is to follow the mandate u/s 421 Cr.P.C. while executing maintenance orders u/s 125(1) Cr.P.C.

From Paras 10, 11 and 12,

10.A careful perusal of the aforesaid provision would show that for recovery of the amount of maintenance, procedure under Section 421(1) has to be followed by either issuing warrant for levying the amount due by attachment and sale of movable property belonging to the offender or by issuing a warrant to the Collector of the district, for authorising him to realise the amount as arrears of land revenue from the movable or immovable property, or both, of the defaulter. Section 421(3) provides that where the Court issues a warrant to the Collector under clause (b) of Subsection (1), the Collector shall realise the amount in accordance with the law relating to recovery of arrears of land revenue, as if such warrant were a certificate issued under such law.
11.A conjoint reading of the provisions contained under Section 125(3) read with Section 421 of CrPC would show that by virtue of Section 125(3) of CrPC, the Magistrate has been empowered to recover the amount of arrears of maintenance by following the procedure prescribed for levy of fine under Section 421 of CrPC. Two modes are prescribed under Section 421 of CrPC for recovery of the arrears of maintenance due as if it were a fine levied. The Court can either issue a warrant for the levy of the amount by attachment and sale of any movable property belonging to the defaulter or issue a warrant to the Collector of the District, authorising him to realise the amount as arrears of land revenue from the movable or immovable property, or both, of the defaulter under Section 421(1)(a) and 421(1)(b) of CrPC. It is only after the Magistrate has exhausted the two modes prescribed under Section 421 of CrPC and still fails to recover the arrears of maintenance due that he can sentence the person who committed the default to imprisonment as enjoined under Section 125(3) of CrPC for the period prescribed in the above-stated provision and if in the execution of sentence of imprisonment so awarded, the defaulter does not appear to suffer, the sentence so awarded, the Court should at the first instance issue summons/notice for his appearance and if the defaulter seems to be avoiding the summons, the Court in the second instance should issue bailable warrant for his appearance to undergo sentence. The Courts, at first and second instance, shall refrain from issuing non-bailable warrant.
12.It is quite vivid that the provisions contained under Section 125(3) of CrPC itself provide that the Court may sentence such a person for whole or
any part of each month’s allowance after the execution of the warrant, as such, Section 125(3) CrPC speaks only of issue of a warrant for levying the amount in the manner provided for levying fines and does not speak of a warrant of arrest. The issue of a warrant for levy of the amount due by way of attachment and sale is a condition precedent to the sentencing of the defaulter to imprisonment. As such, without following the procedure prescribed under Section 421(1)(a) and 421(1)(b) of CrPC and without issuance of warrant of attachment and sale, no warrant can be issued and no order for imprisonment can be passed under Section 125(3) of CrPC.

From Para 17,

17. Reverting to the facts of the instant case in light of the aforesaid legal analysis, it is quite vivid that learned Family Court, finding that the arrears of maintenance is due from the petitioner, straightway issued warrant of arrest without following the procedure laid down in Section 421(1)(a) and 421(1)(b) of CrPC, whereas learned Magistrate ought to have followed the procedure laid down in Section 421 of CrPC for recovering the arrears of the amount of maintenance, and if after following the procedure as envisaged in Section 421 of CrPC by issuance of warrant of attachment of movable and immovable property of the defaulter and sale thereof; still arrears of amount of maintenance remains due, then order of imprisonment can be passed, as such, the order directing issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner is contrary to Section 125(3) read with Sections 421(1)(a) and 421(1)(b) of the CrPC. Accordingly, the order dated 09/05/2019 (Annexure A/1) passed in MJC No. 43/2019 is hereby set aside and learned Family Court is directed to follow the procedure laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Rajnesh (supra) strictly for recovery of the amount of maintenance.

Jagdamba Trivedi Vs Neha Trivedi on 18 Jan 2021

Citations: [LAWS(CHH)-2021-1-96]

Other Sources:

https://www.courtkutchehry.com/judgements/1070468/jagdamba-trivedi-vs-neha-trivedi/

https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/6050d0e69fca195f67640edb

https://www.indianemployees.com/judgments/details/jagdamba-trivedi-versus-neha-trivedi

https://www.the-laws.com/encyclopedia/browse/case?caseId=021202701000&title=jagdamba-trivedi-vs-neha-trivedi#:~:text=He%20would%20also%20submit%20that%20if%20the,(Annexure%20A/2)%20deserve%20to%20be%20set%20aside.


Index of Maintenance Orders u/s 144 BNSS is here.

Posted in High Court of Chhattisgarh Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to CrPC 421 - Warrant for levy of fine Follow CrPC 421 For Maintenance Recovery Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed Jagdamba Trivedi Vs Neha Trivedi Not followed Guidelines in Rajnesh Vs Neha Judgment Reportable Judgement or Order | Leave a comment

S.Mumthas and Anr Vs M.Nizar @ Nizarudeen and Anr

Posted on October 19, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

Case No: OP (Crl.) 802/ 2024

 


Index of Maintenance Judgments under Sec 144 BNSS is here.

Posted in High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents S.Mumthas and Anr Vs M.Nizar @ Nizarudeen and Anr | Leave a comment

Sumit Raj Shivhare Vs Anushree Gupta Shivhare on 05 Nov 2024

Posted on October 7, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A division bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court directed to enhance Maintenance amount at 5% annually.

From Para 21,

(21) So far as the question for grant of interim maintenance to respondent-wife is concerned, an affidavit along with salary slip filed by appellant-husband clearly shows that he is a Software Engineer working in a private Firm, namely, Dassault System Software Solution Private Limited in Pune and getting gross salary of approximately Rs.1,18,875/-per month including other liability. It is averred that respondent- wife is a B. Com, MBA in Retail Business Management and Marketing from MIT College, Pune. From the record, it is found that the learned Family has already awarded maintenance amount to the extent of Rs.25,000/- per month by allowing the application under Section 125 of CrPC to maintain herself and her minor son Aryaman. The same amount of Rs.25,000/- per month awarded by the Family Court is found to be just and proper and, therefore, there is no need to pass separate order for the same.
However, we may add here that the amount of Rs.25,000/- per month shall fetch enhancement every calendar year @ 5% to meet the ends of justice, till it attains finality or altered subsequently in future, in some appropriate proceedings at the instance of parties.

Sumit Raj Shivhare Vs Anushree Gupta Shivhare on 05 Nov 2024

Index of Maintenance Judgments under Sec 144 BNSS is here.

Posted in High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents Misinterpretation of Earlier Judgment or Settle Principle of Law or Per Incuriam Sumit Raj Shivhare Vs Anushree Gupta Shivhare | Leave a comment

Arun R.Naik Vs Shwetha Arun Naik and Anr on 17 May 2021

Posted on October 6, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge of Kerala High Court directed to set aside the enhancement of Maintenance amount at 10% annually.

From Para 3,

3. In the M.C, the 1st petitioner had adduced oral evidence as PW1 and marked Exts.A1 to A10 as documentary evidence. On the respondent’s side, oral evidence was adduced by him as RW1 and Exts.B1 to B11 were marked as documentary evidence. The Family Court has appreciated the above evidence and allowed the M.C granting monthly maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.10,000/- to the 1st petitioner and Rs.7,000/- to the 2nd petitioner, from the date of the petition. The Family Court has also directed the respondent to pay a lumpsum of Rs.30,000/- at the beginning of every academic year before June 30th subject to enhancement at the rate of 10% yearly to the 2nd petitioner for her education with effect from the date of the petition.

From Para 16,

16. The Family Court has ordered the monthly maintenance allowance in favour of the 2nd petitioner as Rs.7,000/- and directed the respondent to pay the same and also an additional sum of Rs.30,000/- within June 30th of every academic year subject to 10% increase annually. The said direction undoubtedly is an unjustifiable one and will not sustain for the reason that the monthly maintenance allowance contemplated under Section 125 Cr.P.C will take within it’s sweep all genuine expenses of the child viz. expenses for education, food, shelter, medicine etc. and therefore, a court while fixing it shall take into account all possible and reasonable expenditures of a child. Therefore, if a lumpsum amount is fixed by the Family Court as payable, undoubtedly it would take care of all reasonable expenditures of the child. Moreover, the direction to pay Rs.30,000/- annually to the 2nd petitioner, in every academic year in addition to a lumpsum amount ordered as payable towards monthly maintenance allowance, is devoid of any basis.

From Para 17,

17. The Family Court has fixed the monthly maintenance allowance payable to the 2nd petitioner as Rs.7,000/- after duly considering the educational expenses also. Therefore the direction to pay Rs.30,000/- as additional sum only to meet the educational expenses is devoid of merits and liable to be set aside.

Finally,

In the result, both revisions are allowed in part. The monthly maintenance allowance stands ordered in favour of the 1st petitioner by the impugned order is modified and reduced to Rs.7,000/- and that to the 2nd petitioner is modified and enhanced to Rs.10,000/-. The direction to pay Rs.30,000/- before 30th June of every academic year subject to 10% enhancement annually is set aside.

Arun R.Naik Vs Shwetha Arun Naik and Anr on 17 May 2021

Index of Maintenance Judgments under Sec 144 BNSS is here.

Posted in High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision Arun R.Naik Vs Shwetha Arun Naik and Anr BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents CrPC 125 or BNSS 144 - Order for Maintenance of Wives Children and Parents | Leave a comment

Rajesh Kumar Vs Nutan Devi on 18 Feb 2025

Posted on October 6, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge of Patna High Court directed to enhance Maintenance amount at 5% annually.

From Paras 16-20,

16. However, I find that undisputedly the petitioner-husband was getting monthly salary of Rs. 30,000/- at the time of filing the maintenance petition and out of Rs. 30,000/-, award of Rs. 15,000/- per month towards maintenance is excessive.
17. Hence, the impugned order is modified by reducing the amount of maintenance @ Rs. 9,500/- per month, payable by the husband to his wife since the date of filing the maintenance petition.
18. However, this rate of maintenance will be subject to increment @ 5% per annum from today. In other words, after one year from today, the amount of the maintenance will be increased by 5% of maintenance and this increment will keep going on in the month of February every year and this maintenance will be permissible to the wife till she remarries.
19. The husband is having higher salary at present. But the number of dependents has also increased, because he has one additional legally wedded wife and one daughter born out of the wedlock with the new wife and as per statement of the learned counsel for the petitioner-husband, even second child is expected in a few months. Hence, increment of maintenance @ 5% per annum would be sufficient in the interest of justice.
20. It further transpires that during the pendency of this petition, petitioner-husband has made some payment. Hence, the petitioner-husband is also directed to pay up the whole arrear amount after setting off the payment already made towards maintenance, within the next two months by way of bank draft. In case, the arrear is not paid, it will be treated as a contempt of Court and the petitioner-husband would be dealt with accordingly.

Rajesh Kumar Vs Nutan Devi on 18 Feb 2025

Index of Maintenance Judgments under Sec 144 BNSS is here.

Posted in High Court of Patna Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents Judiciary Antics Misinterpretation of Earlier Judgment or Settle Principle of Law or Per Incuriam Rajesh Kumar Vs Nutan Devi | Leave a comment

Prakash Dheple Vs Vithabai and Anr on 10 May 2024

Posted on October 6, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge of Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court directed to Impose interest of Maintenance arrears.

From Para 9,

9. No doubt there is an evidence of income of respondent no.1 that she is getting salary of Rs.3,500/- from that job, but when an amount of maintenance, which was granted earlier to the respondents is considered. It is meager amount of Rs. 1500/- and Rs. 2000/- p.m. It was not possible for them to maintain themselves out of it. Therefore, merely because she is doing a job in private Company the applicant who is able bodied husband and father cannot be exonerated from the liability to pay the maintenance. The proceeding under section 125 of the Cr.P.C. is a summary proceeding. On this ground suppressing material fact does not extinguish right of maintenance. It is not an equitable relief which disentitles the persons who are not coming before the Court with clean hands. The learned trial Court has considered the earlier maintenance amount. The learned trial Court has considered the facts situation of both the sides, their status and needs. The learned trial Court has also considered the prices of the essential commodities which have gone high. Even though respondent no.1 is earning some amount, it is not shown that it is more than sufficient amount to her. Further merely because the wife is earning the husband cannot be exonerated from the liability to pay the maintenance amount. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajnesh Vs. Neha and another reported in (2021) 2 SCC 324, though the respondent no.1 has not disclosed the fact that she is earning some amount by doing such a job, she cannot be held liable for giving a false evidence under section 340 of the Cr.P.C. If such course is adopted then it has to be adopted against applicant/husband and wife in each and every case, who are concealing such fact and showing that they are not having source of income.

From Para 12,

12. The applicant has challenged two proceedings of maintenance in this Revision Application. Therefore, also revision is also not maintainable. Revision Application, therefore, sans merit and it deserves to be dismissed with costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand Only) with @ 9% p.m. interest. It is because respondents must have incurred some amount for contesting this revision. The trial Courts are not awarding interest on maintenance amount. There is no any legal ban to award interest on that amount of maintenance. The husbands or fathers are many a times are not depositing the arrears of maintenance for years together. They have no fear or burden to payment of interest on that amount of maintenance. It is a serious legal mischief in mischief. Section 125 of the CrPC does not prohibit towards maintenance. Therefore, Courts of District Judiciary are expected to award interest on the amount of maintenance, so that these weaker sections of the society will get their maintenance amount expeditiously. It will serve the purpose of speed justice. Thus, in order to secure their rights fully, effectively and speedily which is an object of justice interest must be awarded which is rationally expected. Their amount of maintenance shall not remain in the hands of the other side which deprives them for maximum period from it. Thus, it is now mandatory to award interest on the amount of maintenance for that this judgment shall be circulated to the District Judiciary of Maharashtra.

Prakash Dheple Vs Vithabai and Anr on 10 May 2024

Index of Maintenance Judgments under Sec 144 BNSS is here.

Posted in High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents Judiciary Antics Misinterpretation of Earlier Judgment or Settle Principle of Law or Per Incuriam Prakash Dheple Vs Vithabai and Anr | Leave a comment

Sandeep Walia Vs Monika Uppal on 18 Jul 2022

Posted on October 2, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge of Delhi High Court held that

From Paras 7 and 8,

7. Ms. Sunita Arora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-wife vehemently opposed the present revision and submitted that the instant case has to be considered from a different perspective. According to her the revisionist-husband is not truthful in his disclosure in affidavit of income filed before the Family Court. She has drawn the attention of this court to various paragraphs to show that the revisionist claiming himself to be jobless is still incurring a monthly expenditure of about Rs.35,210/- per month. She also points out that the revisionist has shown his mother to be dependent on him, however, has not disclosed that she is already getting a pension of Rs.25,000/- per month. She further states that in column No.26, which relates to a number of the bank account, the revisionist has shown only one account of ICICI Bank whereas he is maintaining a different joint account in the State Bank of India, which has been admitted by him in his cross-examination. She also points out that the revisionist in his educational and professional qualification column has mentioned only graduation, whereas, in his cross-examination, he unequivocally admits that he has done one year diploma in Graphic Designing. She also submits that the revisionist is maintaining a motorcycle and a car and is living in a 3-BHK Flat.

8. From the material available on record, including the cross- examination, she points out that there are various credit entries in the account of her husband. He has also invested amount in mutual funds and he is getting regular dividends therefrom.

From Para 12,

12. Under the aforesaid circumstances, as noted above, it can be safely concluded that the petitioner was not truthful in disclosure of his correct income. His employment as a Driver with his own maternal uncle is also highly unreliable. The lifestyle, which the petitioner is maintaining, would clearly demonstrate that he is capable of earning sufficient money to run not only his livelihood but of his wife also. The respondent-wife while placing documents on record has clearly proved that the petitioner is capable of earning a handsome salary. The petitioner also admitted that he had been earning about Rs.30,000/- per month.

Sandeep Walia Vs Monika Uppal on 18 Jul 2022

Citations: [2022:DHC:2655]

Other Sources:

 


Index of Maintenance cases is here.

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents Insist On Income and Assets Affidavit In Matrimonial Cases Sandeep Walia Vs Monika Uppal | Leave a comment

Nidhi Jain Vs Ankit Jain on 31 Jul 2025

Posted on October 1, 2025 by ShadesOfKnife

A single judge of Delhi High Court held that

5. Reliance is placed on settled legal precedents, including the Supreme Court’s judgment in Rajnesh v. Neha Criminal Appeal 730/2020 and the case of Sandeep Walia v. Monika Uppal CRL.REV.P. 179/2019, which recognize that when a husband conceals his income or assets, the court must take into account his true financial status for the determination of maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Furthermore, the Petitioner cites the case of Vikas Ahluwalia v. Simran Ahluwalia FAO143/2013 and Pasupuleti Venkateswarlu v. The Motor & General Traders Civil Appeal Nos. 2120 to 2122 of 1972, where courts have acknowledged that assets are often transferred in matrimonial disputes to avoid paying rightful dues. The Petitioner further asserts that the Respondent’s actions, including domestic violence, illegal retention of stridhan, and filing of frivolous litigations, are part of a larger scheme to deprive her of her legal entitlements.

17. No doubt, the petition was filed way back in the year 2013 and has not been disposed of till date and applications under Section 311 Cr. PC have been preferred at the stage of final arguments. However, power under Section 311 Cr.P.C can be exercised at any stage of enquiry, trial and other proceedings. Such power can be invoked even at the stage of final arguments.
18. Matrimonial litigation, particularly where financial dependency and concealment are alleged, demands a sensitive and pragmatic approach. The documents and witnesses sought to be introduced by the petitioner are not collateral or immaterial but rather, they directly affect the determination of maintenance which is a matter of subsistence. The Family Court ought to have adopted a more purposive interpretation of its enabling powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C., instead of taking a hyper-technical view.
19. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 07.06.2024 is set aside. The petition is allowed. The learned Family Court is directed to permit the petitioner to summon the concerned witnesses with the relevant record. However, it is directed that the remaining proceedings be conducted expeditiously and all out efforts be made to dispose of the case as early as possible and preferably within a period of next three months. Both sides are directed to cooperate with the trial Court in an effort to expeditiously dispose of the petition.

Nidhi Jain Vs Ankit Jain on 31 Jul 2025

Citations:

Other Sources:


Index of Maintenance cases is here.

Posted in High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification | Tagged 1-Judge Bench Decision BNSS Sec 144 - Order for maintenance of wives children and parents CrPC 311 - Power to summon material witness or examine person present Insist On Income and Assets Affidavit In Matrimonial Cases Nidhi Jain Vs Ankit Jain | Leave a comment

Post navigation

  • Older posts

Search within entire Content of “Shades of Knife”

My Legal X Timeline

Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Follow

AP High Court Advocate with M Tech (CS) || 12 years in 'Software Industry' as Solution Architect || Blogs at https://t.co/29CB9BzK4w || #TDPTwitter

SandeepPamarati
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
yajnshri Tehxi @yajnshri ·
8h

Scientists Can't Explain Why This Ancient Hum Dissolves Pineal Calcification

Reply on Twitter 2068907322228003037 Retweet on Twitter 2068907322228003037 213 Like on Twitter 2068907322228003037 730 X 2068907322228003037
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
ians_india IANS @ians_india ·
21 Jun

Bengaluru, Karnataka: A parent of one of the students says, "... Everyone across India knows that today, on the 21st, the NEET re-examination is being conducted. Yet the Congress has organized a rally here at the Palace Grounds. The roads have been blocked here for the last

Reply on Twitter 2068666640619929836 Retweet on Twitter 2068666640619929836 59 Like on Twitter 2068666640619929836 102 X 2068666640619929836
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
hisbabygirl68 Soldiersgirl 🇺🇸 @hisbabygirl68 ·
20 Jun

This man said he was GLAD Charlie Kirk was murdered…
Then admitted: Charlie’s videos & debates changed his life completely.
His family reconciled.
He saw through the lies that he had been fed all this time .
Charlie is now his HERO.
This is the legacy of Charlie .
Watch every

Reply on Twitter 2068476659477479739 Retweet on Twitter 2068476659477479739 2711 Like on Twitter 2068476659477479739 18066 X 2068476659477479739
Retweet on Twitter Advocate Sandeep Pamarati 🇮🇳💪👨🏻‍🎓 Retweeted
aranganathan72 Anand Ranganathan @aranganathan72 ·
20 Jun

Decades before the UK grooming scandal, India suffered the 1992 Ajmer grooming and mass rape horror. Journalists and politicians hushed it up for fear of being branded Islamophobic. Children who were raped still do the rounds of courts to get justice. As grandmothers.

My views:

Reply on Twitter 2068357171692315063 Retweet on Twitter 2068357171692315063 5323 Like on Twitter 2068357171692315063 11825 X 2068357171692315063
Load More

Recent Posts

  • Pavul Yesu Dhasan Vs Registrar SHRC of TN and Ors on 30 Apr 2025 June 18, 2026
  • Manoj Kumar Vs Nita Bharti on 17 Mar 2026 June 17, 2026
  • Cruelty as a Criminal Offence Explained June 12, 2026
  • Bail Compliance Undertaking Format – Draft, Legal Requirements & Sample Template June 12, 2026
  • Warning Signs of Escalating Matrimonial Litigation – Early Red Flags Every Spouse Should Recognize June 12, 2026

Most Read Posts

  • Reply to Section 41A CrPC Notice – Format with Legal Explanation (4,936 views)
  • Anu Aggarwal Vs Sushant Aggarwal on 20 Jan 2026 (3,463 views)
  • Umme Farva Vs State of U.P. and Anr on 14 Jan 2026 (3,351 views)
  • Charge Sheet and Final Report Explained (2,800 views)
  • Regular Bail Application Format (Section 437/439 CrPC) (2,183 views)
  • Neha Lal Vs Abhishek Kumar on 20 Jan 2026 (1,992 views)
  • Arrest Procedure in 498A cases after Arnesh Kumar (1,923 views)
  • Discharge Application Format in 498A Case – Draft, Procedure & Sample Template (1,765 views)
  • Can You Travel Abroad After an FIR Is Registered? – Legal Position Explained (1,679 views)
  • Atul Kumar Bajpai Vs State of UP and Anr on 17 Sep 2025 (1,534 views)

Tags

Reportable Judgement or Order (433)2-Judge (Division) Bench Decision (413)Legal Procedure Explained - Interpretation of Statutes (382)Landmark Case (381)1-Judge Bench Decision (362)Catena of Landmark Judgments Referred/Cited to (293)Work-In-Progress Article (215)3-Judge (Full) Bench Decision (101)Sandeep Pamarati (92)Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty (80)Issued or Recommended Guidelines or Directions or Protocols to be followed (71)Perjury Under 340 CrPC (66)Absurd Or After Thought Or Baseless Or False Or General Or Inherently Improbable Or Improved Or UnSpecific Or Omnibus Or Vague Allegations (61)Reprimands or Setbacks to YCP Govt of Andhra Pradesh (49)Summary Post (47)CrPC 482 - Quash (43)HM Act 13 - Divorce Granted to Husband (42)Legal Terrorism (41)Divorce granted on Cruelty ground (41)Not Authentic copy hence to be replaced (40)

Categories

Supreme Court of India Judgment or Order or Notification (753)Bare Acts or State Amendments or Statutes or GOs or Notifications issued by Central or State Governments (328)High Court of Andhra Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (186)High Court of Delhi Judgment or Order or Notification (164)High Court of Bombay Judgment or Order or Notification (112)High Court of Karnataka Judgment or Order or Notification (93)Legal Procedure (77)High Court of Madras Judgment or Order or Notification (70)High Court of Allahabad Judgment or Order or Notification (61)LLB Study Material (59)General Study Material (56)High Court of Punjab & Haryana Judgment or Order or Notification (52)Assorted Court Judgments or Orders or Notifications (50)High Court of Kerala Judgment or Order or Notification (46)Prakasam DV Cases (46)Judicial Activism (for Public Benefit) (45)District or Sessions or Magistrate Court Judgment or Order or Notification (44)High Court of Madhya Pradesh Judgment or Order or Notification (38)High Court of Gujarat Judgment or Order or Notification (28)High Court of Calcutta Judgment or Order or Notification (27)

Recent Comments

  • eCourts India on Compromise-Based Quashing in Matrimonial Cases – Complete Legal Strategy
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • The Divorce Law Firm on Life Cycle Stages of a Divorce case
  • ShadesOfKnife on Sandeep Pamarati Vs Ungrateful Knife (IPC 498A Case)
  • KONURU VINAYKUMAR on Sandeep Pamarati Vs Ungrateful Knife (IPC 498A Case)

Archives of SoK

  • June 2026 (9)
  • May 2026 (24)
  • April 2026 (33)
  • March 2026 (42)
  • February 2026 (30)
  • January 2026 (21)
  • December 2025 (2)
  • November 2025 (3)
  • October 2025 (17)
  • September 2025 (12)
  • August 2025 (5)
  • July 2025 (10)
  • June 2025 (15)
  • May 2025 (3)
  • April 2025 (10)
  • March 2025 (7)
  • February 2025 (8)
  • January 2025 (1)
  • December 2024 (3)
  • November 2024 (4)
  • October 2024 (16)
  • September 2024 (15)
  • August 2024 (14)
  • July 2024 (11)
  • June 2024 (18)
  • May 2024 (13)
  • April 2024 (9)
  • March 2024 (23)
  • February 2024 (15)
  • January 2024 (11)
  • December 2023 (11)
  • November 2023 (9)
  • October 2023 (13)
  • September 2023 (12)
  • August 2023 (15)
  • July 2023 (17)
  • June 2023 (11)
  • May 2023 (6)
  • April 2023 (5)
  • March 2023 (10)
  • February 2023 (9)
  • January 2023 (12)
  • December 2022 (12)
  • November 2022 (8)
  • October 2022 (13)
  • September 2022 (17)
  • August 2022 (10)
  • July 2022 (21)
  • June 2022 (27)
  • May 2022 (23)
  • April 2022 (32)
  • March 2022 (17)
  • February 2022 (6)
  • January 2022 (2)
  • December 2021 (7)
  • November 2021 (7)
  • October 2021 (6)
  • September 2021 (10)
  • August 2021 (31)
  • July 2021 (45)
  • June 2021 (17)
  • May 2021 (17)
  • April 2021 (18)
  • March 2021 (58)
  • February 2021 (14)
  • January 2021 (50)
  • December 2020 (35)
  • November 2020 (68)
  • October 2020 (67)
  • September 2020 (28)
  • August 2020 (41)
  • July 2020 (20)
  • June 2020 (36)
  • May 2020 (40)
  • April 2020 (38)
  • March 2020 (26)
  • February 2020 (43)
  • January 2020 (35)
  • December 2019 (34)
  • November 2019 (4)
  • October 2019 (18)
  • September 2019 (57)
  • August 2019 (33)
  • July 2019 (12)
  • June 2019 (18)
  • May 2019 (5)
  • April 2019 (19)
  • March 2019 (58)
  • February 2019 (11)
  • January 2019 (90)
  • December 2018 (97)
  • November 2018 (43)
  • October 2018 (31)
  • September 2018 (73)
  • August 2018 (47)
  • July 2018 (143)
  • June 2018 (92)
  • May 2018 (97)
  • April 2018 (59)
  • March 2018 (8)

Blogroll

  • Daaman Promoting Harmony 0
  • Fight against Legal Terrorism Fight against Legal Terrorism along with MyNation Foundation 0
  • Good Morning Good Morning News 0
  • Insaaf India Insaaf Awareness Movement 0
  • MyNation Hope Foundation Wiki 0
  • MyNation.net Equality, Justice and Harmony 0
  • Sarvepalli Legal 0
  • Save Indian Family Save Indian Family Movement 0
  • SIF Chandigarh SIF Chandigarh 0
  • The Male Factor The Male Factor 0
  • Unitedmen Foundation a dedicated community forged with the mission to unite men facing legal challenges in marital disputes. 0
  • Vaastav Foundation The Social Reality 0
  • Vinayak my2centsworth – This blog is for honest law abiding men, married or planning to get married 0
  • Voice4india Indian Laws, Non-profits, Environment 0
  • Writing Law Writing Law by Ankur 0

RSS Cloudflare Status

  • ARN (Stockholm) on 2026-06-25 June 25, 2026
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jun 25, 00:00 - 05:00 UTC Jun 19, 14:18 UTC Scheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in ARN (Stockholm) datacenter on 2026-06-25 between 00:00 and 05:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window […]
  • ARN (Stockholm) on 2026-06-24 June 24, 2026
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jun 24, 00:00 - 05:00 UTC Jun 19, 13:08 UTC Scheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in ARN (Stockholm) datacenter on 2026-06-24 between 00:00 and 05:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window […]
  • MSP (Minneapolis) on 2026-06-23 June 23, 2026
    THIS IS A SCHEDULED EVENT Jun 23, 03:00 - 08:00 UTC Jun 18, 18:30 UTC Scheduled - We will be performing scheduled maintenance in MSP (Minneapolis) datacenter on 2026-06-23 between 03:00 and 08:00 UTC.Traffic might be re-routed from this location, hence there is a possibility of a slight increase in latency during this maintenance window […]

RSS List of Spam Server IPs from Project Honeypot

  • 182.161.69.88 | S June 21, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 19 | First: 2011-01-28 | Last: 2026-06-21
  • 34.178.153.229 | SD June 21, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 7 | First: 2026-06-21 | Last: 2026-06-21
  • 8.231.237.42 | S June 21, 2026
    Event: Bad Event | Total: 56 | First: 2026-06-21 | Last: 2026-06-21
Owned and Operated by Advocate Sandeep Pamarati
Proudly powered by WordPress
Theme: Flint by Star Verte LLC

Bad Behavior has blocked 1104 access attempts in the last 7 days.

pixel