SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, RAJESH BINDAL, JJ.
Aditi alias Mithi – Appellant
Versus
Jitesh Sharma – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3446 of 2023, S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 11954 of 2023
Decided On : 06-11-2023
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 125 – Quantum of monthly maintenance – High Court vide impugned cryptic order has reduced amount of maintenance from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 7,500/- – Family Court, while awarding maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month to appellant (minor daughter), had considered material placed before it – Family Court had passed a detailed order giving reasons – Comprehensive guidelines were issued in Rajnesh v. Neha and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 324 pertaining to overlapping jurisdiction among courts when concurrent remedies for grant of maintenance are available under Special Marriage Act, 1954, Section 125 Cr.P.C., Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and criteria for determining quantum of maintenance, date from which maintenance is to be awarded, enforcement of orders of maintenance including fixing payment of interim maintenance – As a result, litigation which should close at trial level is taken up to this Court and parties are forced to litigate – Impugned order passed by High Court is cryptic and is bereft of reasons – Impugned order set aside and matter remitted to High Court for consideration afresh. (Paras 7, 13, 14 and 15)
Facts of the case:
Appellant-minor daughter of respondent-father is aggrieved of order passed by High Court by which order passed by Family Court was modified. Family Court had fixed maintenance for appellant Rs. 20,000/- per month, which was reduced to Rs.7,500/- per month by High Court.
Findings of Court:
As in the case in hand, the impugned order passed by High Court is cryptic and is bereft of reasons. Same deserves to be set aside and the matter is liable to be remitted to High Court for consideration afresh. Ordered accordingly.
Result : Appeal disposed of with directions.
JUDGMENT :
VIKRAM NATH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. As per the office report dated 30.10.2023, the respondent had refused to receive notice, hence, the service is deemed to be complete.
3. The appellant-minor daughter of the respondent-father is aggrieved of the order1 [Dated 28.06.2023 in Criminal Revision No. 4939 of 2022] passed by the High Court2 [High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior] by which the order3 [Dated 30.11.2022] passed by the Family Court4 [Family Court, Guna] was modified. The Family Court had fixed maintenance for the appellant Rs. 20,000/- per month, which was reduced to Rs. 7,500/- per month by the High Court.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the marriage between the mother of the appellant and the respondent was solemnized in the year 2008. Out of the wedlock a boy and a girl were born. The custody of the boy is with the respondent whereas the appellant is living with the mother. A divorce petition was filed by the respondent-husband in January 2018 before the Family Court. In May 2018 the appellant and her mother-Shikha Sharma filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Family Court. The divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband was allowed by the Family Court on 10.09.2022. Vide order dated 30.11.2022, the Family Court partly allowed the application filed by the appellant and her mother under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and awarded maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month for the appellant-minor daughter. The wife was denied any maintenance. The order qua that became final.
5. The High Court vide impugned cryptic order has reduced the amount of maintenance from Rs. 20,000/- to Rs. 7,500/-. Despite service the respondent has not chosen to appear before this Court. He is shirking to take care of the appellant (minor daughter) who is 6-7 years of age at present. Prayer is that the impugned order passed by the High Court be set aside and that the order of the Family Court be restored.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the paper book.
7. From a perusal of the order passed by the Family Court awarding maintenance of Rs. 20,000/- per month to the appellant (minor daughter), it is evident that the court had considered the material placed before it. However, the High Court in revision, filed against the aforesaid order by the respondent, recorded that earlier the respondent was doing private work and at present he is financially distressed.
8. The manner in which maintenance payable under Section 24 of the Hindu Mariage Act, 1955 or Section 125 Cr.P.C. is to be assessed, was considered by this Court in its celebrated judgment in Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another, (2021) 2 SCC 324. Detailed guidelines were issued. It was noticed that the terms of maintenance are decided on the basis of pleadings of parties and on the basis of some amount of guess work. It is often seen that both the parties submit scanty material and do not disclose correct details. The tendency of the wife is to exaggerate her needs, whereas the husband tends to conceal his actual income. Keeping that in view, this Court laid down the procedure to streamline grant of maintenance. The judgments of various courts were referred to and response from various State Legal Services Authorities was sought. This Court even requested the National Legal Services Authority to submit a report on the suggestions received from the State Legal Services Authorities for framing guidelines on the affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities to be filed by the parties. Guidelines were issued in exercise of powers under Article 136 read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India, prescribing a uniform format of Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities to be filed in maintenance proceedings. The judgment was delivered on 04.11.2020. The affidavit was to be submitted in all maintenance proceedings including pending proceedings. The directions given are extracted as under:
Quantum of monthly maintenance – Court must follow Apex Court guidelines.
The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with Supreme Court guidelines for maintenance proceedings, including the filing of affidavits disclosing assets and liabilities.
Accurate financial disclosure is mandatory for determining interim maintenance in divorce proceedings, requiring both parties to submit Affidavits of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities.
The obligation of a husband to provide maintenance to his wife is paramount, and proper income disclosure is essential for determining maintenance quantum.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of disclosure of assets and liabilities in maintenance proceedings, as well as the court's authority to direct the filing of specifi....
In matters of maintenance, full disclosure of financial information by both parties is essential; incomplete disclosure may lead to adverse inferences for determining interim and final maintenance.
The obligation of a husband to maintain his wife under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. is not diminished by the wife's earning capacity, and proper financial disclosures are essential in maintenance proce....
Courts can grant maintenance under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act while other maintenance orders exist; proper assessment of the husband's income is essential for determining just....
Maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. requires financial disclosure from both parties to ensure just outcomes, and non-compliance does not invalidate previous orders.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.