A husband has a sacrosanct legal and moral obligation to maintain his wife and children, and the quantum of maintenance must be determined based on the husband's income, standard of living, and current inflation rates, regardless of claims of no income if he is able-bodied.

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. When the matter is called out learned advocate for the applicant is not present while perusing the earlier order dated 21.07.2025, it appears that applicant was also not present therefore, it appears that he is not interested in proceed with the matter. Hence, in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Taj Mohammad v. State of Uttar Pradesh , decided on 11.08.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.2421 of 2023, this Court has considered the averments made in the application as well as the material placed on record and has proceeded to decide the matter in the absence of the applicant based on available material on record.

2. Present criminal revision application under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been preferred by the applicant requesting to quash and set aside the order dated 16.07.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Ahmedabad in Criminal Misc. Application No.885 of 2013.

3. The case of the applicant is that the applicants, being the original applicants, state that applicant No.1 is the wife and applicant No.2 is the minor child, while respondent No.1 is the husband of applicant No.1 and father of applicant No.2. The marriage between applicant No.1 and respondent No.1 was solemnized on 20/05/2005 at village Abaliyara, Taluka Kadi, District Mehsana, after which applicant No.1 started residing at her matrimonial home at Kadi with the articles given by her parents. Initially treated well, she was, after about six months, subjected to mental and physical cruelty, including dowry- related harassment and false allegations by respondent No.1 and his relatives. Despite enduring such harassment, she continued to reside in the matrimonial home in the hope of improvement. During this period, she became pregnant and delivered applicant No.2 on 21/08/2007 at her parental home; however, respondent No.1 neither cared for her nor maintained relations. Upon returning to her matrimonial home, she was demanded ₹7,00,000 by the in-laws and was subjected to continuous physical and mental cruelty, including assault by respondent No.1 under the influence of alcohol. Ultimately, upon her inability to meet the demand, she was driven out of the matrimonial home and has since been residing with her minor son at her parental home without any source of income. The applicants thereafter filed Maintenance Application No. 885 of 2013 on 26/04/2013 before the learned Principal Judge, Ahmedabad. Upon conclusion of the proceedings, the learned Principal Judge partly allowed the application by awarding maintenance of only ₹1,200/- per month to applicant No.1 (wife) and rejected the claim for maintenance of applicant No.2 (minor child) by order dated 16/07/2018.

4. It is submitted by the applicant in the application that the impugned order passed by the learned Principal Judge is illegal, unjust, and contrary to the evidence on record, and therefore deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is submitted that the applicant No.1 was subjected to continuous cruelty and dowry demands and was ultimately driven out of the matrimonial home along with her minor son, and since then she has been residing separately without any source of income. Despite this, the learned Judge has awarded a meagre amount of ₹1,200/- per month to the wife and has rejected the claim of the minor child. It is further submitted that the learned Judge failed to appreciate that the respondent is earning around ₹40,000/- per month and has neglected his responsibility to maintain both the wife and t