IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the mandatory requirement of filing Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities in maintenance proceedings as established in Rajnesh v. Neha.

JUDGMENT :

This Original Petition has been filed challenging the interim order of maintenance passed by the Family Court, Kollam, in a proceeding under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short, Cr.P.C.).

2. The petitioner is the husband of the 1 ^st respondent and the father of the 2 ^nd respondent. The marriage and paternity are not in dispute. The respondents filed a petition for maintenance as M. C. No.115/2019 before the Family Court, Kollam against the petitioner. They also filed an application for interim maintenance as Crl.M.P. No.295/2019. The Family Court, after hearing both sides, granted interim monthly maintenance of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand only) each to respondents 1 and 2. The said order is under challenge in this Original Petition.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Adv. R. Kishore and the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2, Adv. Binu George.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable for non- compliance with the specific direction of the Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha and Another [(2021) 2 SCC 324] regarding the requirement of the parties in a proceeding under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. to file an affidavit disclosing their assets and liabilities. The learned Counsel for the respondents 1 and 2, on the other hand, submitted that since the Family Court has ordered the payment of the interim maintenance based on all relevant materials, mere failure to take on record the asset affidavits shall not render its order invalid.

5. The Supreme Court in Rajnesh (supra) laid down a procedure to streamline the grant of maintenance in maintenance proceedings. The Court also set out criteria for determining the quantum of maintenance, the date from which maintenance was to be awarded, how to enforce orders of maintenance, and the fixing of payment of interim maintenance. Noticing that in maintenance proceedings the wife tends to exaggerate her needs and the husband tends to conceal his actual income, the Supreme Court made it mandatory to file an Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities by the parties in all such proceedings, including pending proceedings before the Family Court/ District Court/ Magistrate’s Court concerned, as the case may be, throughout the country. A uniform format for the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities to be filed in such proceedings was prescribed. The format of the said affidavit was annexed as Enclosures I, II and III with the judgment. Keeping in mind the need for a uniform format of Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities to be filed in maintenance proceedings, the Supreme Court framed guidelines in the exercise of the powers under Article 136 read with Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The guidelines framed by the Supreme Court are as follows:

"72.1. (a) The Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities annexed at Enclosures I, II and III of this judgment, as may be applicable, shall be filed by the parties in all mainte- nance proceedings, including pending proceedings before the Family Court / District Court / Magistrate's Court concerned, as the case may be, throughout the country.

72.2. (b) The applicant making the claim for maintenance will be required to file a concise application accompanied with the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets;

72.3. (c) The respondent must submit the reply along with the Affidavit of Disclosure within a maximum period of four weeks. The courts may not grant more than two opportuni- ties for submission of the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities to the respondent. If the respondent delays in filing the reply with the affidavit, and seeks more than two adjournments for this purpose, the court may consider exer- cising the power to strike off the defence of the respondent, if the conduct is found to be wilful and contumacious in de- laying the proceedings (Kaushalya v. Mukesh Jain,

2020 (17) SCC 822

: 2019 SCC