Conviction Under Section 409 IPC Postulates Strict Proof Of Entrustment; Suspicion However Grave Cannot Substitute Proof: Supreme Court Criminal Prosecution Emanating From Past Matrimonial Relationship Ought Not To Linger After Divorce: Supreme Court Negligence Of Previous Counsel Not A Ground To Reopen Concluded Pre-Charge Evidence Under Section 311 CrPC: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Agreement To Sell Cannot Protect Tenant's Possession Under Section 53A Transfer Of Property Act: Delhi High Court Certified Copies Of Registered Sale Deeds Admissible As Secondary Evidence Without Proving Loss Of Original: Gauhati High Court Counsel Representing Deceased Party Must Inform Court Of Death Under Order XXII Rule 10-A CPC: J&K High Court Son Staying In Father's House Out Of Love And Affection Is A Mere Licensee, Cannot Challenge Father's Title: Delhi High Court Conviction For Murder Cannot Stand Where Single Blow Inflicted In Sudden Fight Without Premeditation: Uttarakhand High Court Inability To Trace Suppliers Or Buyers No Ground For Custodial Interrogation Once Recovery Is Effected: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Assemble Peacefully To Celebrate Association Anniversary Is A Fundamental Right; Unlawful Assembly Per Se Not An Offence: Madras High Court Marriage Photographs Can Be Relied Upon To Estimate Quantity Of Gold Ornaments In Matrimonial Disputes: Kerala High Court POCSO Act Not Confined To Securing Convictions, Soul Of Law Lies In Preserving Childhood Dignity & Healing: Madras High Court Special Appeal Maintainable If Single Judge's Order Relates To Authority Acting Without Statutory Appellate Jurisdiction: Allahabad High Court Recall Of Witness For Cross-Examination Permissible On Newly Framed Issue Post-Remand Even If Disposal Timeline Is Fixed: Karnataka High Court Litigant Cannot Overcome Law Of Limitation By Shifting Blame On Counsel Through Inconsistent Stands: Madras High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Cross-Cases Cannot Be Clubbed If Co-Accused In Complaint Case Is Absconding & Complainant Delayed Process: Allahabad High Court Preventive Detention Not Warranted If Person Can Be Dealt With Under Ordinary Laws; No Effort To Arrest In Pending Cases: Supreme Court Accused Languishing In Jail For 9 Years Deserves Bail; Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Violated: Supreme Court Custodial Death | Pendency Of Criminal Trial No Bar For Awarding Compensation Under Public Law Remedy: Gauhati High Court Suit For Possession Under Section 6 Specific Relief Act Barred If Filed Beyond Six Months Of Dispossession: Madras High Court Subsequent Purchaser Is Representative Of Judgment Debtor, Separate Suit Challenging Execution Sale Barred Under Section 47 CPC: Kerala High Court Statutory Bail Restrictions Melt Down When Pre-Trial Detention Is Prolonged & Trial Is Unlikely To Conclude Soon: Delhi High Court Failure To Apprise Accused Of Right Under Section 50 NDPS Act Vitiates Search & Recovery: J&K & Ladakh High Court Section 12(5) Arbitration Act Inapplicable To Proceedings Commenced Before 2015 Amendment; Executing Court Can't Apply Neutrality Norms Retrospectively: Punjab & Haryana High Court Banks Can Share Sale Proceeds Of Secured Assets Outside Liquidation Estate With Homebuyers Under Compromise Agreement: Kerala High Court Election Disputes Must Be Resolved Expeditiously; Long Stays Render Adjudication A Mockery Of Justice: Madras High Court Delhi High Court Suspends LOC, Permits Businessman To Travel Abroad For Healthcare Conferences; Cites Roots In Society & Past Compliance Section 138 NI Act Complaint Not Maintainable By Third Party Who Is Neither Payee Nor Holder In Due Course: Allahabad High Court

Truth and Justice Prevail Over Technicalities in Family Law Disputes,” Delhi High Court Upholds Fresh Income Affidavit in Maintenance Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Delhi High Court, in a landmark ruling, emphasized the supremacy of truth and justice over procedural formalities in family law matters. Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta dismissed a petition challenging the Family Court’s decision to permit a fresh income affidavit in a maintenance case under Section 125 Cr.P.C., reinforcing the principle that the pursuit of truth is paramount in such disputes.

The case, titled Sachin Kumar Daksh v. Mamta Gola and Anr, revolved around the petitioner’s objection to the respondent’s (his wife’s) filing of a fresh income affidavit in ongoing maintenance proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The petitioner contested that the new affidavit, which amended details from the original, could affect a pending application under Section 340 Cr.P.C.

The dispute stems from a divorce petition filed by the petitioner and a subsequent maintenance petition by the respondent. The respondent sought to amend her income affidavit after her initial submission was contested by the petitioner for containing incorrect information. The Family Court initially denied this request but later permitted the amendment, following the High Court’s intervention.

Justice Mendiratta, in his assessment, emphasized the role of Family Courts in ensuring justice and the pursuit of truth. He noted, “The maintenance granted to the wife is as a measure of social justice and the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is with an objective to protect women and children from vagrancy and destitution.” The judge underscored that technicalities should not overshadow the fundamental objective of reaching the truth in family disputes.

The court referenced the precedent set in Rajnesh v. Neha and Another, and a similar case (CRL.M.C.260/2024), where objections against an amended affidavit were dismissed. It was observed that the filing of a fresh affidavit does not negate the earlier one and that any false affidavit consequences would be addressed separately, without impacting the Section 340 Cr.P.C. application.

The High Court dismissed the petition, upholding the Family Court’s decision to allow the filing of a fresh income and expenditure affidavit. The court stated that this would enable an accurate assessment of maintenance without prejudicing the petitioner.

Date of Decision: February 16, 2024

Sachin Kumar Daksh v. Mamta Gola and Anr

Latest Legal News