125 CrPC | Provident Fund and ESPPs Cannot Be Deducted As Compulsory Outflows To Reduce Income: Supreme Court Enhances Child Maintenance, Rules

"Unlike Income Tax payment or professional taxes which are mandatory taxes, PFs and ESPPs are not permanent charges but rather will accrue into the account of the Respondent-husband which can be deposited by the depositor in the future." Supreme Court, in a significant ruling dated August 10, 2026, held that voluntary financial instruments like Provident Funds and Employee Stock Purchase Plans cannot be treated as compulsory deductions to reduce a salaried spouse's monthly income for computing maintenance obligations.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh observed that such investments ultimately accrue back to the employee and remain accessible as future wealth.

Matrimonial Discord And Maintenance Litigation T

he marriage between the parties was solemnized in December 2004, leading to the birth of two sons in 2011 and 2014. Following the breakdown of the matrimonial relationship, the husband left the shared residence in June 2018, prompting the wife to institute divorce proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act alongside an application for interim maintenance. The family court and later the Delhi High Court awarded child maintenance, which was subsequently challenged through various petitions and contempt proceedings concerning arrears and escalating school fees.

Determining Real Disposable Income And Child Support

The primary question before the court was whether voluntary financial deductions like Provident Funds and stock plans should be excluded from a spouse's gross income when calculating maintenance. The court was also called upon to determine the appropriate quantum of maintenance for the minor children and the ailing wife in light of changing medical circumstances.

Court Rejects Voluntary Deductions In Income Computation "Provident Fund and ESPPs Are Ultimate Benefits"

The bench firmly established that deductions which eventually benefit the earner cannot be categorized as mandatory outlays like statutory taxes. The court noted that unlike income tax or professional tax, contributions towards provident funds and employee stock purchase plans are savings vehicles rather than permanent financial losses.

"Accruing Benefits Remain With The Depositor"

Emphasizing the nature of these financial instruments, the judges held that such amounts accumulate in the account of the employee and remain subject to future withdrawal, thus retaining their character as disposable income for the purpose of assessing maintenance capacity.

"Maintenance Estimation Involves Reasonable Approximation"

Building upon established jurisprudence, the court reiterated that maintenance assessments must reflect the actual lifestyle and financial capacity of the parties rather than rigid mathematical exactitude.

"Children Entitled To Parental Standard of Living"

The court underscored that minor children are entitled to enjoy the same standard of living and educational facilities that their parents command through their financial standing and social status.

Medical Emergencies As Crucial Factor For Enhancement "Mindful of Expenses For Cancer Treatment"

The bench took judicial note of the appellant-wife's diagnosis with aggressive breast cancer during the pendency of the proceedings, which severely impaired her earning capacity and increased her financial burden while she single-handedly raised both children.

"Enhancement of Personal Maintenance"

Recognizing the medical exigencies, the court factored in the monthly maintenance payable directly to the wife towards her medical upkeep, elevating the support mechanism to ensure that her debilitating illness did not compromise the welfare of the household.

"No Prejudice To Future Circumstances"

The apex court clarified that the quantum fixed does not preclude the appellant from seeking further upward revisions should circumstances alter significantly in the future.

Final Directions and Enhancement of Quantum

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part by enhancing the monthly maintenance for both children to a total of Rs 1,50,000, translating to Rs 75,000 per child, effective from January 1, 2025. Additionally, the personal maintenance for the appellant-wife was enhanced to Rs 30,000 per month to cushion her cancer treatment expenses, while directing the respondent-husband to clear all outstanding obligations within three months.

Date of Decision: 10 August 2026