Allegations In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Specific And Supported By Foundation Facts To Avoid Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Sentence To Period Already Undergone Citing Medical Condition And Expression Of Remorse Qualification Of '10+2 System' Cannot Be Equated With Other Certifications Absent An Equivalence Clause: Supreme Court Essential Qualifications In Recruitment Cannot Be Diluted Or Subject To Judicial Equivalence: Supreme Court Court Has Discretion To Decide Genuineness Of Signature By Comparison; Not Essential To Invoke Expert Opinion In All Cases: Supreme Court Civil Disputes Cannot Be Converted Into Criminal Offences To Recover Money: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Under Section 420 IPC Taxing Authorities Must Classify Goods Based On Form At Time Of Sale, Not End Use: Supreme Court Suit For Declaration Of Status Must Seek Consequential Relief To Avoid Bar Of Proviso: Allahabad High Court Illegal Detention | Police Failure To Maintain CCTV Footage Invokes Adverse Presumption Under Sec 119 BSA Against State: Allahabad High Court Section 138 NI Act | Accused Rebuts Presumption By Proving Intimation Of Misplaced Cheque To Bank And Lack Of Documentation For Alleged Settlement: Andhra Pradesh High Court Garnishee Proceedings Under CPC | Disputed Debt Cannot Be Summarily Adjudicated Without Leading Evidence: Bombay High Court Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act 2022 | Magistrate’s Power Under Section 5 To Direct DNA Profiling Is Not Conditional Upon Consent: Calcutta High Court Conviction Based On 'Assumption And Presumption' Cannot Be Sustained: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Limitation Act | Suit For Specific Performance Must Be Filed Within Reasonable Time Even If No Date For Performance Is Fixed: Delhi High Court Enrolment As Advocate | Bar Council Must Consider 'Equivalent Qualifications' Under Rule 4(a) Rules Of Legal Education: Karnataka High Court Section 482 BNSS | Pre-Arrest Bail Is Not A Matter Of Course; Must Show Special Case For Invoking Extraordinary Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Hindu Succession Act | A Co-parcener Cannot Alienate Entire Property; Non-Impleaded Legal Heir Not Bound By Previous Decree: Madras High Court Purchaser During Pendency Of Suit Bound By Compromise Decree, Cannot Treat It As Void In Collateral Proceedings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1-A CPC | In Partition Suits, Defendants Asserting A Share Can Seek Transposition If Original Plaintiffs Withdraw: Patna High Court Section 69 BNS | Suppression Of Subsisting Marriage Or Live-In Relationship During Marriage Proposal Constitutes 'Deceitful Means': Kerala High Court Anticipatory Bail | Mere Apprehension Of Investigating Agency Is Insufficient To Deny Bail Without Demonstrating Necessity Of Custodial Interrogation: Telangana High Court Income Tax Evasion | Criminal Prosecution Under Section 276C IT Act Cannot Sustain Once Foundation Assessment Order Is Set Aside: Punjab & Haryana High Court

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