Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Practicality in Maintenance Orders, Directs Husband to Pay Rs. 15,000 Monthly

Keywords: Punjab & Haryana High Court, maintenance order, Section 125 CrPC, interim maintenance, Family Court, financial realities, wife’s dependence, judicial pragmatism.

High Court Revises Maintenance Order, Highlights Realistic Approach

The Punjab & Haryana High Court recently revised a Family Court’s order regarding maintenance, directing a husband to pay Rs. 15,000 per month to his wife. The Court emphasized that maintenance rulings must consider practical financial realities and rejected the denial of maintenance based solely on the wife’s past nominal employment.

Case Background

The wife, who sought interim maintenance, was earlier denied support by the Family Court. Instead, the Court awarded Rs. 8,000 per month solely for the couple’s minor child, citing her previous nominal role as a director in her brother’s business as an indication of her capacity to support herself.

The petitioner argued that her past role was titular, limited to the period before her marriage, and that she became fully dependent on her husband post-marriage. She highlighted her lack of income or resources to sustain herself.

Conversely, the husband contended that the wife’s earlier employment demonstrated her capacity for financial independence, disqualifying her from claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

Court’s Observations

The High Court rejected the Family Court’s reasoning and upheld the wife’s right to maintenance, focusing on her present inability to maintain herself rather than her past employment status. It observed:

• “What is crucial is her present inability to maintain herself, not her past employment or financial independence.”
• “Courts must adopt a pragmatic approach by focusing on substantive financial realities rather than being influenced by the mere formal appearance of employment or income.”

The Court emphasized that a wife’s nominal employment before marriage cannot justify denying her maintenance after marriage. Judicial rulings must reflect the practical realities of dependency and financial need.

Revised Maintenance Award

Acknowledging the husband’s monthly income of approximately Rs. 86,000, the Court balanced his financial capacity with the wife’s reasonable needs. Modifying the Family Court’s decision, the High Court directed the husband to pay Rs. 15,000 per month as interim maintenance to the wife, effective from the date of the original petition.

Significance

This judgment underscores the importance of adopting a realistic and pragmatic approach in maintenance cases, prioritizing current financial realities over past circumstances. It reaffirms the principle that a wife’s dependence on her husband post-marriage is a valid basis for claiming support under Section 125 of the CrPC.

Stay tuned for live updates on the rupee’s movement and real-time business news on Kanishk Social Media—your go-to source for comprehensive stock market and legal news.

JUDICIARY INDIA CONSTITUTION – KSM LAW PUBLISER

ASHUTOSH DUBEY – kanishksocialmedia Broadcasting & Media Production | LinkedIn