Lethargy Is Not an Exceptional Circumstance: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Striking Off of Defence for Delay in Filing Written Statement Vague Decree of Injunction Can’t Be Executed by Attaching Machines: Rajasthan High Court Strikes Down Execution Order Mere permission to join proceedings without allowing filing of written statement is illusory: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Ex Parte Proceedings Unregistered Power of Attorney Can’t Transfer Property: MP High Court Denies Title, Dismisses Ejectment Suit Mere Non-Recovery of Weapon Is Not Fatal When Circumstantial and Medical Evidence Prove Guilt Beyond Doubt: Allahabad High Court Failure to Examine Gazetted Officer and Magistrate Who Certified Seizure Goes to Root of Fair Trial Under NDPS Act : Calcutta High Court Tender Years Doctrine Is No Longer Good Law: Delhi High Court Slams Mother’s Custody Claim Built on Parental Alienation Negation of Bail is the Rule in NDPS Cases Involving Commercial Quantity: Himachal Pradesh High Court Denies Bail Single Stab Injury in Heat of Passion During Sudden Quarrel Is Not Murder: Kerala High Court Section 10 CPC Inapplicable To Labour Court Proceedings; Stay Of Individual Disputes Denied: Karnataka High Court 138 NI Act | Once Issuance and Signature on Cheque Are Admitted, Burden Shifts on Accused to Dislodge Statutory Presumption: Madras High Court Confession Cannot Substitute Proof: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Convicted of Wife’s Murder "Sole Eyewitness Testimony, Corroborated by Medical and Recovery Evidence, Is Enough to Sustain Conviction Under Section 302 IPC: Allahabad High Court Partition Once Effected Cannot Be Reopened on Vague Allegations of Fraud: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Registered Family Partition Deed Cancellation of Land Acquisition Compensation Without Allegation or Hearing Is Arbitrary: Supreme Court Restores Compensation to Innocent Land Owner Whether Act Was in Discharge of Official Duty Is a Question of Fact — Magistrate, Not High Court, Must Decide: Supreme Court Restricts Writ Interference in BNSS Cases Section 175(4) BNSS | Affidavit Is Not Optional — Even Complaints Against Public Servants Must Follow Procedural Rigour: Supreme Court Magistrate Cannot Be Directed to Recall His Judicial Order by a Writ Court: Supreme Court Warns Against Article 226 Interference in Pending Criminal Proceedings Even In Absence of Written Demand, If Substantial Dispute Exists or Is Apprehended, Reference Under Section 10 ID Act Is Valid: Supreme Court Absence of Classical Signs of Strangulation and Possibility of Hanging Nullifies Homicidal Theory: Supreme Court Holds Medical Evidence Alone Cannot Prove Guilt Confession Must Be Direct Acknowledgment of Guilt, Not Mere Presence at Scene: Supreme Court Slams Misuse of Section 164 CrPC Reversal of Acquittal Without Dislodging Trial Court’s Reasoning Is Impermissible: Supreme Court Restores Acquittal

Supreme Court Slams 'Shocking' Reduction of Maintenance for Women: 'Drastic Cut Unjustified'

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has strongly criticized a "shocking" reduction in maintenance awarded to women under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The judgment, delivered by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah on September 15, 2023, reinstated the importance of ensuring adequate support for women.

The case, titled *Richa Devi vs. Gautam KR Pandey @ Gautam Pandey*, revolved around the High Court's decision to drastically reduce the monthly maintenance amount for a woman from Rs. 5,000 to a mere Rs. 1,000. The Supreme Court, in its scathing observation, found no justification for such a drastic reduction, emphasizing the significance of fair and reasonable maintenance.

In the judgment, the Court stated, "It is shocking that the maintenance amount has been so drastically reduced to a petty amount of Rs. 1,000 per month for a lady to maintain herself." This observation underscores the Court's commitment to safeguarding the rights of women in matters of personal maintenance.

The judgment further emphasized the duty of the court to ensure that women receive adequate support and that reductions to unreasonably low amounts are not justified. It highlighted the need to consider the financial well-being and dignity of women while determining maintenance amounts.

Additionally, the judgment reaffirmed the Court's authority to subject High Court orders to judicial review when they are deemed manifestly unjust. In this case, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and reinstated the Trial Court's award of Rs. 5,000 per month as maintenance.

This landmark decision serves as a reminder of the judiciary's commitment to protecting the rights and dignity of women. It establishes a precedent for fair and reasonable maintenance awards, setting a benchmark for future cases in family law.

Date of Decision: September 15, 2023

RICHA DEVI   vs GAUTAM KR PANDEY @ GAUTAM PANDEY       

Latest Legal News