Husband’s Duty to Provide Maintenance Irrespective of Income: Allahabad High Court Upholds Maintenance Order

Share:
advocate judicial party Advocates live steel v properly Evidence Divorce Property Factual Bail FIR 376 Bail bail Child Allahabad High Cour 1989 Appointment Investigation Cheque Fear mother IIIT court Law application Acquittal 29A Marriage Maintenance Dowry Application dowryMarriage bail Land Earning Justice Written Statement Maintenance Summoning Rape Video Death Bail Guilty jurisdiction 138Assault investigation Temple bail Wife velectricity Child Drinking final murder Love Cheque Throwing Brick Husband NDPS Case  allahabad addition preliminary evidence Cheque Bounce murder evidence grievances dowry 210 consideration order corporation advocate certificate marriage application mechanical maintenance financial evidence electricity wife probation bail individual investigation

In a significant ruling that reaffirms the responsibility of a husband to provide maintenance to his wife, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a criminal revision petition challenging an order of maintenance granted by the Family Court. The case, titled Kamal vs. State Of U.P, was presided over by Hon’ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J.

The revisionist, Kamal, had contested the Family Court’s decision which directed him to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs. 2,000 to his wife. The revisionist’s argument hinged on the claim that his wife was self-sufficient and living in adultery. However, the court found these claims unsubstantiated.

In her judgment, Hon’ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J., emphasized the husband’s duty to maintain his wife, stating, “For the sake of argument, if the court presumed that the revisionist has no income from his job or from rent of Maruti Van, even then the revisionist is duty-bound to provide maintenance to his wife.” This statement highlights the court’s stance on the fundamental responsibility of a husband towards his wife’s maintenance, irrespective of his income or her alleged earning capacity.

The court noted the lack of documentary evidence regarding the wife’s alleged income and the revisionist’s illness. It was also observed that the revisionist, being the only son, had agricultural income from land in his father’s name. Hon’ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal, J., pointed out, “It is also evident from the record that the revisionist is a healthy man and is capable of earning money and is liable to maintain his wife.”

Rejecting the claim of adultery due to a lack of evidence, the court upheld the Family Court’s order, deeming the amount of Rs. 2,000 per month as a ‘meager amount’ considering the liabilities and assets of the revisionist.

The judgment concluded with the dismissal of the revision petition and an upholding of the Family Court’s decision dated February 21, 2023. The court also ordered the trial court to take coercive action against the revisionist for the recovery of maintenance.

 Date of Decision: 25.01.2024

Kamal VS State Of U.P 

Download Judgment

Share: