Full Judgment Text
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Judgment reserved on: 19.11.2025
Judgment pronounced on: 16.02.2026
Judgment uploaded on: 19.02.2026
+ CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 & CRL.M.A. 16466/2024
RAKESH RAY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Deepak Tyagi and Mr.
Ishaan Seth, Advocates.
versus
PRITI RAY .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Atul Chaubey and Mr.
Chandan Sharma, Advocates.
+ CRL.REV.P. 926/2024 & CRL.M.A. 21142/2024
PRITI RAY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Atul Chaubey and Mr.
Chandan Sharma, Advocates.
versus
RAKESH RAY .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Deepak Tyagi and Mr.
Ishaan Seth, Advocates.
+ CRL.REV.P. (MAT.) 45/2025 & CRL.M.A. 2519/2025
RAKESH RAY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Deepak Tyagi and Mr.
Ishaan Seth, Advocates.
versus
PRITI RAY & ANR. .....Respondents
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 1 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
Through: Mr. Atul Chaubey and Mr.
Chandan Sharma, Advocates.
CORAM:
HON’BLE DR. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
J U D G M E N T
Index to the Judgment
FACTUAL BACKGROUND ................................................................... 3
Proceedings under the PWDV Act .................................................................. 4
6
Proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. ...............................................
7
SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE COURT ..............................................
7
A. Submissions qua orders passed under proceedings in PWDV Act ........
B. Submissions qua order passed under proceedings in Section 125 of the
Cr.P.C. ................................................................................................................ 10
ANALYSIS & FINDINGS .................................................................... 12
A. Whether the wife has any independent source of income and, if
so, whether she is entitled to the grant of maintenance? ................... 13
Denial of maintenance to the wife by the learned Magistrate .............. 13
Denial of maintenance to the wife by the learned Appellate Court .... 19
Grant of maintenance to the wife by the learned Family Court .......... 22
25
Marital Expectations and Social Context in Indian Households .........
Practical Realities and Barriers to Re-entry into the Workforce after
Marital Breakdown ..................................................................................... 27
The Myth of the ‘Idle’ Wife ...................................................................... 28
Conclusion: Wife is entitled to grant of interim maintenance ............. 30
B. Whether the income of the husband has been correctly assessed
and appropriately apportioned between the wife and the minor
31
child for the purpose of maintenance? ....................................................
36
C. Final Quantum of Maintenance ...........................................................
38
Mediation, not Litigation ...........................................................................
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 2 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J.
1. These three revision petitions arise out of matrimonial disputes
between the husband, Rakesh Ray, and the wife, Priti Ray, and
pertain to orders passed in relation to the grant or denial of
maintenance in favour of the wife and the minor child of the parties.
Since the issues involved in all the three petitions are inter-connected
and arise from common facts, the same are being decided by this
Court by way of the present common judgment.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the parties were
first married on 22.06.2012 at Arya Samaj Mandir, Jamuna Bazaar,
Delhi. Thereafter, on 15.02.2013, the parties again solemnised their
marriage in accordance with Hindu rites and customs at Kashipur,
Uttarakhand. Between February 2013 and December 2015, the
parties resided together at Durgapur, West Bengal, where the
husband was employed. It is stated that in the year 2015, the parties
also adopted a male child. Subsequently, in February 2016, the
parties shifted to Kuwait, as the husband secured employment with
Kuwait Oil Corporation. It is stated that during this period, the parties
used to visit India from time to time. In February 2020, the parties
returned to India along with their son; however, they were unable to
return to Kuwait due to the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. It is
alleged that on 18.08.2020, the husband deserted the wife and the
minor son and left for Kuwait. Aggrieved by the conduct of her
husband, the wife alleges that she was subjected to acts of cruelty at
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 3 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
his hands in the past also. In this backdrop, she initially lodged
complaints against the husband at Police Station Mohan Garden,
Delhi and before the CAW Cell, Dwarka.
3. Thereafter, in June 2021, the wife filed a petition under Section
125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereafter „ Cr.P.C. ‟],
seeking maintenance of ₹2.5 lakhs per month for herself and the
minor son, which was registered as MT No. 329/2021.
4. On 03.09.2021, the wife also filed a petition under Section 12
of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005
[hereafter „ PWDV Act ‟], which was registered as MC No. 567/2021.
5. Before this Court, CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 filed by the husband
and CRL.REV.P. 926/2024 filed by the wife arise out of the
proceedings under the PWDV Act, whereas CRL.REV.P. (MAT.)
45/2025 filed by the husband pertains to the proceedings under
Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.
Proceedings under the PWDV Act
6. The complaint under Section 12 of the PWDV Act filed by the
wife was first taken up on 04.09.2021 by the learned Metropolitan
Magistrate, Mahila Court-05, Dwarka Courts, Delhi [hereafter
„ Magistrate ‟], pursuant whereto the Domestic Incident Report (DIR)
was called for and thereafter filed by the Protection Officer. On
30.10.2021, summons were issued to the husband, who was arrayed
as respondent no. 1 in the said complaint. Vide order dated
05.01.2022, both the parties were directed to file their Affidavits of
Income and Assets along with copies of their bank account
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 4 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
statements and Income Tax Returns (ITRs) for the last three years.
The parties thereafter placed the relevant documents on record.
7. On 22.10.2022, the learned Magistrate directed the husband to
pay ad-interim maintenance of ₹10,000/- per month towards the
minor child, along with payment of his school fees.
8. Thereafter, vide order dated 20.04.2023, the learned
Magistrate, while deciding the application for interim relief under
Section 23 of the PWDV Act, awarded interim maintenance of
₹10,000/- per month to the minor child. The said amount was
exclusive of expenses towards school fees, uniform, and other allied
charges, which were also directed to be borne by the husband.
However, no interim maintenance was granted to the wife on the
ground that she was able-bodied and well-educated but had chosen
not to seek employment and had instead opted to remain dependent
upon the husband. It was further observed that the wife had not
disclosed complete details regarding her financial capacity.
9. Aggrieved by the said order, the wife preferred an appeal
under Section 29 of the PWDV Act, being Criminal Appeal No.
255/2023. Vide order dated 31.01.2024, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-03 & Special Judge (Companies Act), South West,
Dwarka Courts, Delhi [hereafter „ Appellate Court ‟], partly allowed
the appeal. The interim maintenance payable to the minor child was
enhanced from ₹10,000/- to ₹50,000/- per month from the date of
filing of the petition till the date of the order, and further enhanced to
₹60,000/- per month from the date of the order till disposal of the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 5 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
petition. Interim maintenance to the wife, however, was again
declined by the Appellate Court, observing that she had filed bank
account statements only for the last two years instead of three years,
and therefore, her actual income could not be properly assessed.
10. It is the aforesaid order dated 31.01.2024, passed by the
learned Appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No. 255/2023, which has
been assailed before this Court by both the parties. In CRL.REV.P.
718/2024, the husband is aggrieved by the enhancement of interim
maintenance payable to the minor son from ₹10,000/- to ₹50,000/-
per month from the date of filing of the petition till the date of the
order, and further to ₹60,000/- per month from the date of the order
till disposal of the petition. In CRL.REV.P. 926/2024, the wife is
aggrieved by the denial of interim maintenance in her favour.
Proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C.
11. The petition under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. was first taken
up for hearing on 30.06.2021 by the learned Judge, Family Courts,
Dwarka, Delhi [hereafter „ Family Court ‟]. Both the parties filed their
respective affidavits of income. On 08.12.2021, the learned Family
Court observed that during the period between August 2020 and
January 2021, there was an admitted transfer of ₹8.4 lakhs from the
husband to the wife, though no payments had been made thereafter.
Upon a statement being made by the husband that he would deposit a
sum of ₹1.5 lakhs in the bank account of the wife within three days,
the parties were referred to counselling. The counselling, however,
did not yield any settlement.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 6 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
12. Consequently, vide order dated 17.05.2024, the learned Family
Court granted interim maintenance of ₹50,000/- per month to the
wife and ₹40,000/- per month to the minor child.
13. The aforesaid order dated 17.05.2024 has been assailed by the
husband before this Court by way of CRL.REV.P. (MAT.) 45/2025.
SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE COURT
A. Submissions qua orders passed under proceedings in PWDV Act
Submissions on behalf of the wife
14. The learned counsel appearing for the wife argues that the
impugned order passed by the learned Appellate Court is erroneous,
suffers from non-application of mind, and warrants interference by
this Court. It is submitted that while the learned Appellate Court has
itself recorded a prima facie finding that the wife was subjected to
domestic violence and is entitled to interim relief, it has nevertheless
failed to grant any interim maintenance to her. It is contended that the
denial of interim maintenance is based on an incorrect assessment of
the income affidavit and bank statements filed by the wife and on
submissions made on behalf of the husband which were factually
incorrect. The learned counsel submits that the finding that the wife
was working with Lakme and receiving income is wholly
misconceived. Attention is drawn to the relevant bank entries to show
that on 06.11.2020, the wife had made a payment of ₹27,140/- to
Lakme through her debit card, which transaction was initially
reversed and the amount refunded, followed by a fresh payment of
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 7 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
the same amount on the same day. It is submitted that these entries do
not reflect any receipt of income from Lakme but only payments
made by the wife towards a course. It is, therefore, argued that the
conclusion drawn by the learned Appellate Court regarding the wife‟s
income is factually incorrect.
15. It is further contended that the learned Appellate Court has
wrongly held that the wife failed to comply with the directions of the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court with regard to filing of three years‟ bank
account statements. The learned counsel submits that the wife had
filed her bank account statements from 14.09.2020 till 01.08.2022,
which was sufficient in the facts of the case, as prior thereto the
parties were residing together and the wife was entirely dependent on
the husband even for day-to-day expenses. It is argued that the wife
did not have any independent bank account prior to that period and
that the adverse inference drawn by the learned Appellate Court is
unjustified. The learned counsel further submits that the observation
of the learned Appellate Court that the wife had not approached the
Court with clean hands is also incorrect. It is stated that all relevant
facts and documents were placed on record and nothing was
concealed.
16. It is also argued that the learned Appellate Court erred in
factoring the alleged dependency of the widow sister and her children
while apportioning income. It is submitted that neither the widowed
sister nor her children are financially dependent, which is evident
from the bank statements, as no regular financial support is shown to
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 8 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
have been extended to them. It is also pointed out that they do not
reside with the husband and that the children of the widow sister have
already received government compensation.
Submissions on behalf of the husband
17. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the
husband contends that the learned Appellate Court has failed to
appreciate the settled principles governing maintenance. It is argued
that the object of maintenance proceedings is not to punish a person
for past conduct, but to prevent vagrancy by ensuring support to
those who are unable to maintain themselves. It is argued that in the
present case, the wife is capable of maintaining herself and
contributing towards the expenses of the child.
18. It is further contended that under the law, the initial burden lies
on the wife to establish that she is unable to maintain herself. The
learned counsel submits that despite unexplained entries in the bank
account, being qualified as a beautician, and leading a comfortable
lifestyle, no responsibility towards the child‟s expenses has been
shown to have been shouldered by the wife, even though the husband
has somehow continued to meet the educational expenses of the
child.
19. The learned counsel further submits that the learned Appellate
Court has failed to appreciate that the learned Magistrate had passed
a well-reasoned order dated 20.04.2023, which adequately took care
of the day-to-day needs of the child. It is submitted that the learned
Magistrate had directed payment of school fees, books, uniform,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 9 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
transportation, extracurricular expenses, and an additional amount of
₹10,000/- per month towards the child‟s expenses. It is argued that
there was no justification for the learned Appellate Court to doubt the
reasoning of the learned Magistrate.
20. It is also submitted that the enhancement of maintenance for
the child by the learned Appellate Court was done in a mechanical
manner, without due consideration of the peculiar facts of the case. It
is argued that while the Hon‟ble Supreme Court has repeatedly
cautioned against a straight-jacket formula in maintenance matters,
the learned Appellate Court has proceeded to mechanically divide
income as if the matter was being finally decided.
B. Submissions qua order passed under proceedings in Section 125 of
the Cr.P.C.
Submissions on behalf of the husband
21. The learned counsel appearing for the husband contends that
the learned Family Court has failed to appreciate that the jurisdiction
for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and under
the PWDV Act is parallel in nature, and once interim maintenance
had already been adjudicated upon under the PWDV Act on the same
set of facts and material, there was no necessity for the learned
Family Court to re-adjudicate the issue of interim maintenance
afresh.
22. It is further argued that the learned Family Court has failed to
apply the principles laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court, that
the object of maintenance proceedings is not to punish a person for
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 10 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
past conduct but to prevent vagrancy by compelling those who are
capable to support those who are unable to maintain themselves. It is
submitted that in the present case, the wife is competent to maintain
herself and to contribute towards the expenses of the child,
particularly when the husband has been bearing the school fees and
other related expenses.
23. The learned counsel further submits that while granting
maintenance to the child, the learned Family Court ought to have
taken into consideration the order already passed by the learned
Appellate Court in the proceedings under the PWDV Act, even if the
said order is being challenged. It is argued that instead of enhancing
the maintenance payable to the child, the learned Family Court
should have harmonised the relief by adjusting or setting off the
amounts already directed to be paid. It is further contended that the
learned Appellate Court under the PWDV Act had assessed the
capacity of the wife to maintain herself, which aspect was not duly
considered by the learned Family Court.
24. It is also argued that the learned Family Court has failed to
recognise that the responsibility of raising the child is a joint
responsibility. It is contended that the wife is able-bodied and skilled,
and therefore equally responsible for sharing the expenses of the
child, particularly when she is residing in and enjoying the only
family house in Delhi NCR. In contrast, it is submitted that the
husband has been subjected to multiple litigations and is constrained
to stay either with friends or in hotels while contesting the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 11 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
proceedings.
Submissions on behalf of the wife
25. Per contra , the learned counsel appearing for the wife supports
the order passed by the learned Family Court and submits that the
same is just, fair, and based on a correct appreciation of the material
on record. It is argued that the learned Family Court has rightly held
that the wife has no independent source of income, while the husband
is earning a substantial amount abroad.
26. It is further submitted that the learned Family Court has
carefully considered the financial capacity of the husband, the
absence of any proven earnings of the wife, and the needs of the
minor child, and has arrived at a reasonable quantum of interim
maintenance. It is contended that the mere existence of proceedings
under the PWDV Act does not bar the learned Family Court from
exercising its jurisdiction under Se+5 of the Cr.P.C., particularly
when the reliefs granted under both statutes are distinct and serve the
object of preventing destitution. It is therefore argued that the order
passed by the learned Family Court strikes a proper balance between
the rights and obligations of the parties and does not call for any
interference by this Court.
ANALYSIS & FINDINGS
27. The common questions which arise for consideration and are
central to the adjudication of the present three revision petitions are
as under:
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 12 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
(i) Whether the wife has any independent source of
income and, if so, whether she is entitled to the grant
of maintenance?
(ii) Whether the income of the husband has been
correctly assessed and appropriately apportioned
between the wife and the minor child for the purpose
of maintenance?
A. Whether the wife has any independent source of income and, if
so, whether she is entitled to the grant of maintenance?
Denial of maintenance to the wife by the learned Magistrate
28. In the present case, this Court notes that the learned Magistrate
has denied interim maintenance to the wife on multiple grounds. For
reference, the observations of the learned Magistrate are set out
below:
“12. Thus, the intention of the legislation is never to encourage
willful unemployment and unnecessary dependence on the
husband. In the present case, the complainant has claimed that
she is unemployed. However, her statement of account shows
otherwise. She has frequent transactions in her bank account
involving large sums of money, often in the hundreds and
thousands of rupees. Additionally, she engages in cash
transactions involving similarly high amounts. In her previous
income affidavit, she has stated that the respondent had
illegally transferred one property which was in her name and
was gifted by her father. However, she has not specified the
details of this property in the column i.e., 'Details of transfer
deeds or transactions of alienation of properties previously
owned by the applicant, executed during the subsistence of
marriage, which was meant for this purpose. She also failed to
rectify this mistake as early as possible. She has also stated to
have borrowed loans of around Rs.20,00,000/-, the details of
which has again not been disclosed. She has also not disclosed
the sources of borrowing loan and on what basis the loan was
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 13 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
granted to her as she has claimed to be unemployed.
13. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered
opinion that the complainant is able-bodied and well educated
however, she has chosen not to seek employment and instead
be a dependent on her husband. She has also materially
concealed her income and assets and has not disclosed the
complete facts before the court. The complainant ought to have
filed an additional affidavit in order to bring correct facts
before the court. Therefore, I am not inclined to grant any
maintenance to the complainant in view of her conduct and
considering her capacity to earn.”
29. Firstly, the learned Magistrate has observed that although the
complainant claimed to be unemployed, her bank account statements
indicated otherwise, as they reflected frequent transactions involving
large sums of money, often running into hundreds and thousands of
rupees. In this regard , this Court has perused the bank account
statements of the wife which were placed on record before the
learned Magistrate. A careful examination thereof reveals that the so-
called large amounts primarily pertain to transfers made by the
husband into the bank account of the wife during the period between
August 2020 and January 2021. Against each such transaction, the
purpose of transfer has also been specifically mentioned. These
include a transfer of ₹2 lakhs towards a make-up artist course,
transfers of ₹1 lakh each on three occasions towards monthly
expenses for November 2020, December 2020 and January 2021, and
an amount of ₹50,000/- towards monthly expenses for September
2020. Thus, it is evident that the amounts paid by the husband to the
wife after he had left the wife and the minor son in India and returned
alone to Kuwait, have been treated as the wife‟s income and made the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 14 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
basis for doubting her claim of unemployment. Such an approach, in
the considered view of this Court, is wholly misplaced.
30. The learned Magistrate has further observed that “additionally,
she engages in cash transactions involving similarly high amounts.”
This Court is unable to discern from the record as to the basis of this
observation or as to how the learned Magistrate arrived at the
conclusion that the wife was engaging in cash transactions involving
such high amounts. No material was placed on record by either of the
parties which could have invited such an observation from the
learned Magistrate.
31. The learned Magistrate has next noted that the wife, in her
earlier income affidavit, had mentioned that the husband had illegally
transferred a property which stood in her name and had been gifted to
her by her father, without providing details thereof. In this regard,
this Court is of the view that such an averment by the wife could be
in the nature of an allegation of economic abuse and illegal alienation
of her property by the husband. Whether such allegation is ultimately
proved or not is a matter to be examined during trial. However, the
same had no bearing whatsoever on the question as to whether the
wife was earning any income or was capable of maintaining herself,
so as to disentitle her to interim maintenance.
32. Similarly, the learned Magistrate has also observed that the
wife in her later income affidavit had disclosed that she had obtained
loans of approximately ₹20 lakhs, without furnishing complete
details regarding the source of such loans or the basis on which the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 15 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
same were granted, particularly when she claimed to be unemployed.
On this aspect as well, this Court is of the view that the wife had
specifically stated in her income affidavit that she had obtained loans
amounting to about ₹19.5 lakhs from her friends and family
members. Even otherwise, the fact that the wife had to borrow money
from her friends and relatives could not be considered as a factor for
deciding her earning/income so as to deny her interim maintenance.
33. Further, the inference sought to be drawn that a person who
has no earning capacity could not have been extended financial
assistance by way of loans is misplaced in the given facts and
circumstances. It is a matter of common experience, particularly in
the Indian social context, that a daughter who has been deserted by
her husband often returns to her parental home, and in such
circumstances, parents and close family members do not abandon her
or her children merely on the ground that she may not have an
immediate source of income or because her husband has refused to
maintain her. Financial assistance in such situations is often extended
out of familial responsibility and support, and not after assessing the
daughter‟s capacity to repay the amount to them in future. Thus, the
mere fact that the wife claimed to have received financial
assistance/loans from her parents or relatives in a time of need cannot
be construed as evidence of her financial independence or earning
capacity nor can it be treated as a false or misleading disclosure. The
observations made by the learned Magistrate on this count were,
therefore, unwarranted.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 16 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
34. It is on the aforesaid grounds, coupled with the reasoning that
the complainant was an able-bodied and well-educated woman who
had chosen not to work and instead remain dependent upon her
husband, that interim maintenance was declined in her favour. This
Court is clearly of the view that the reasoning adopted by the learned
Magistrate borders on perversity, as the same also runs contrary to
settled principles laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court as well as
this Court governing the grant of maintenance and interim
maintenance.
35. It has been consistently held by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court
that there is a clear distinction between the – capacity to earn and
actual earning – and merely because a wife is capable of earning
cannot be a ground to deny maintenance in the absence of any proof
of actual income. It has further been emphasised by the Courts that
even where a wife earns some income, the Court must assess whether
such income is sufficient for her sustenance and enables her to live in
a manner commensurate with the status she would have enjoyed in
the matrimonial home.
36. In this regard, this Bench in Tasmeer Qureshi v. Asfia Muzaffar:
2025 SCC OnLine Del 7272 had observed as under:
“(vi) Earning by the Wife Not Sole Ground to Deny
Maintenance to Her and the Child in Her Custody
60. It is equally important to reiterate that the mere fact that a
wife is earning some amount cannot, by itself, be a ground to
deny her claim for maintenance, particularly where she has the
custody of a minor child and is bearing the primary
responsibility for the child's upbringing. The law on this point
is well settled. In Sunita Kachwaha v. Anil Kachwaha , (2014)
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 17 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
16 SCC 715 : (2015) 3 SCC (Cri) 589 : (2015) 3 SCC (Civ)
753, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that even if the wife is
employed and earning, that alone does not disentitle her to
maintenance if her income is insufficient to enable her to
maintain herself and her children in accordance with the
standard of living that she enjoyed in the matrimonial home.
Maintenance, after all, is not a matter of charity but of right - a
continuing obligation flowing from the marital relationship,
which the husband cannot evade merely by pointing to the
wife's limited earning capacity.
61. In Vineet Gupta v. Bhawna Gupta , 2025 : DHC : 3622, this
Bench had also observed that the approach of the Court in
maintenance matters is not guided by gender, but by
responsibility, need, and fairness. A custodial parent, whether
mother or father, shoulders a dual burden : maintaining
professional responsibilities while providing care, emotional
support, and stability to the children. Further, the role of a
working custodial parent is not that of an individual living
alone, but of one sustaining an entire family unit single-
handedly. Therefore, even if such a parent earns, the Court
must take into account the demands of childcare, household
expenses, and the reduced capacity to take on additional work
or income-generating opportunities. It was inter alia observed
as under:
*
62. In the context of maintenance, this understanding assumes
great significance. A working mother who is also the primary
caregiver does not stand on the same footing as a financially
independent individual with no dependents. Her income, even
if regular, is often substantially offset by the expenses of the
child's education, healthcare, and daily needs. To deny her
maintenance on the ground that she earns something would be
to disregard the economic and emotional realities of single
parenthood.
63. The test, therefore , is not whether the wife earns, but
whether her income is sufficient to meet her and her child's
reasonable needs, consistent with the standard of living they
were entitled to during the subsistence of marriage.”
37. In the present case, it is material to note that while it is not in
dispute that the wife had enrolled herself in a make-up artist course,
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 18 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
the wife contends that she was unable to complete the same as the
respondent husband paid only ₹2 lakhs towards the course fee, as
reflected in her bank account statement, and did not make the
remaining payment. The husband, on the other hand, claims that the
wife had completed the said course. Whether the wife was able to
complete the course or not is clearly a matter requiring evidence and
cannot be adjudicated at the stage of interim maintenance.
38. But even assuming, for the sake of argument, that the wife had
completed the make-up artist course, the same by itself cannot
constitute a valid ground to deny her maintenance – in the absence of
any material to show that she was actually earning an income
sufficient to sustain herself and to live a life reasonably comparable
to that of the husband.
Denial of maintenance to the wife by the learned Appellate Court
39. It is further important to note that the learned Appellate Court,
while deciding the appeal filed under the PWDV Act, has also
declined interim maintenance to the wife vide order dated
31.01.2024. The primary reasons for such denial were as under:
“23. In the present case, it has been argued that the
complainant is earning well, being a make-up artist. There are
certain entries in her bank statement which shows that she is
receiving some payment from Lakme which stopped reflecting
in her bank account after a while.
24. It is a well settled law that in order to seek maintenance,
one has to come with clean hands and complete disclosure has
to be made. Let us assess what complainant has stated about
her income and what supporting documents she has filed.
25. The complaint had filed her affidavit of assets wherein she
had stated that she is unemployed and is dependent upon her
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 19 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
mother sister and brother for her maintenance. She had filed
the bank statements of her ICICI Bank from 14.09.2020 till
10.06.2021, from 01.06.2021 till 31.08.2021 and from
01.08.2021 till 01.08.2022. She had also stated that she had
taken loan of Rs.18.65 lakhs and another loan of Rs.79,000/-.
26. On 05.01.2022, the parties were directed to file affidavit of
their income and assets in terms of Rajnesh vs. Neha & Ors. in
Cri.A. No. 730/2020 decided on 04.11.2020 alongwith
statement of bank account, ITRs and latest salary slip by
learned Trial Court. However, the complainant had filed the
bank statement from 14.09.2020 till 01.08.2022 though it was
to be filed for preceding three years in terms of Rajnesh vs.
Neha (Supra). The said compliance has not been done which
was a mandatory requirement. The assessment of income of
complainant is not possible without complete bank statement.
It cannot be assessed as to how much amount she is actually
earning. No reasons have been given for non-disclosure of the
remaining bank entries. Hence, she is not entitled to any
interim maintenance in view of the non-disclosure of the
complete facts.”
40. Notably, the learned Appellate Court observed in the
impugned order that there were certain entries in the bank account
statement of the wife indicating receipt of some amounts from
Lakme, which thereafter ceased. However, in this regard , the
attention of this Court has been specifically drawn by the learned
counsel for the wife to the entries pertaining to Lakme appearing in
her bank account statement. A careful perusal thereof reveals that on
06.11.2020, the wife had initially made a payment of ₹27,140/- to
Lakme through her debit card, which amount was subsequently
credited back on account of reversal of the transaction, as reflected in
the entry “MPS/PAYMNT RVSL/LAKMEACADE”. On the same
day, the wife again made a payment of ₹27,140/- to Lakme towards
the said course. Thus, the entries relied upon by the learned Appellate
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 20 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
Court effectively pertain to a single payment of ₹27,140/- made by
the wife to Lakme, and not to any receipt of income from Lakme. A
similar debit entry reflecting a payment of ₹20,562/- made by the
wife to Lakme on 30.09.2020 is also borne out from the record.
Therefore, at this stage, this Court finds that there are no entries in
the bank account of the wife which indicate receipt of any amount
from Lakme.
41. Another significant observation made by the learned Appellate
Court in order dated 31.01.2024 was that in January 2022, the parties
had been directed to file affidavits of income and assets in terms of
the judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha :
(2021) 2 SCC 324 , along with their bank account statements. It was
observed that the complainant-wife had filed bank account statements
for the period from September 2020 till August 2022, i.e. for about
two years, whereas she was required to file statements for the
preceding three years. On this basis, the learned Appellate Court
concluded that since the directions in Rajnesh v. Neha (supra) had
not been fully complied with, it was not possible to assess her income
and, consequently, she was not entitled to interim maintenance.
42. In the considered view of this Court, the aforesaid reasoning is
also erroneous. The learned Appellate Court has clearly failed to take
note of the undisputed position that till August 2020, the parties were
admittedly residing together and the husband was taking care of the
wife as well as the minor son. It is not the case of either party that the
wife was earning any income prior to August 2020. Further, the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 21 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
make-up artist course in which the wife had enrolled was admittedly
after the parties had separated, and the payment of ₹2 lakhs made by
the husband towards the said course is reflected in the bank account
statement of September 2020. Thus, even if the wife had not filed
bank account statements for the period prior to August 2020, and
filed statements for the period September 2020 till August 2022, the
same could not have been made a sole ground to deny her interim
maintenance by holding that her income could not be assessed. This
is particularly so when there was no allegation, much less any
material, to suggest that she was earning any income whatsoever
during the period when the parties were residing together i.e. till
August 2020.
43. Therefore, this Court is of the view that both the learned
Magistrate as well as the learned Appellate Court, in proceedings
under the PWDV Act, have misdirected themselves and failed to
correctly appreciate the central issue, that whether the wife was
entitled to interim maintenance.
Grant of maintenance to the wife by the learned Family Court
44. On the other hand, this Court finds that the learned Family
Court, while adjudicating the issue of interim maintenance in
proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. has correctly
appreciated the material on record at the interim stage. The relevant
portion of the order dated 30.06.2021 is extracted hereunder:
“13) Respondent has claimed that petitioner is capable to
maintain herself as she is Make Up Artist and doing job and
earning handsome amount.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 22 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
14) Disputed facts related to income of the parties cannot be
decided at this stage. Right and liabilities of parties, at this
stage, is liable to be decided on the basis of their income
affidavits and supporting documents.
15) At this stage, there is no sufficient material to accept the
plea of the respondent that his wife has sufficient income to
maintain herself and the child.
16) Merely on the basis of the photograph as makeup artist it
cannot be said that she is able to maintain herself.
*
18) In this case petitioner has shown herself as BA which is not
a professional degree. From the year of marriage i.e. 2013 to
2020 when the respondent left India petitioner no.1 claimed to
be maintained by respondent and this fact has not been
specifically denied. Respondent is denying his liability to
maintain his wife on the ground that she is a makeup artist. If
this plea of respondent is accepted then also it cannot be said
that petitioner no.l is capable to maintain herself. If makeup
artist course was done by the petitioner no.1 in year 2021 or
subsequent then it is clear that petitioner no.1 is at very initial
stage of her profession and at this stage it is very difficult to
assess her income by profession of makeup artist. There is no
income of petitioner no.l reflecting from her documents but it
may be assessed Rs.20,000/- to Rs.30,000/-pm. This assessed
amount is very less in comparison to the income of
respondent. In these circumstances keeping in view disparity
between assessed income of petitioner no.l and declared
income of respondent, this Court is of opinion that respondent
is liable to pay maintenance amount to petitioner no.l also.
Petitioner no.l has shown monthly expenses of child @
Rs.40,000/-.”
45. In this Court‟s view, the learned Family Court, in the
abovesaid order, has rightly held that merely because the wife may
have pursued a make-up artist course or because certain photographs
depicting her as a make-up artist were placed on record, the same
could not be a ground to deny interim maintenance in the absence of
any substantive material establishing her actual earnings or monthly
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 23 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
income. It was also noticed that as per her affidavit of income and
assets, the wife was a B.A. (Hons) graduate and had no source of
income. In its order dated 08.12.2021, the learned Family Court had
also taken note of the contention of the wife that the photographs
relied upon by the husband pertained to the period when she was
pursuing the make-up artist course and not thereafter.
46. The learned Family Court further observed in the aforesaid
order that even if the wife had completed the make-up artist course in
the year 2021 or thereafter, she would be at a very nascent stage of
her profession, making it difficult to assess her income at that stage.
It was further observed that even if it were assumed that the wife was
earning something, her income would not be more than ₹20,000/- to
₹30,000/- per month, which was very less when compared to the
income of the husband.
47. This Court also notes that the parties were married in the year
2012 and had resided together till August 2020. During this entire
period, the wife was neither employed nor earning any income. It is
also not in dispute that even prior to the marriage, the wife had never
been employed and had no independent source of income.
48. At this stage , this Court notes that while addressing the
question of entitlement of the wife to maintenance, the learned
counsel appearing for the husband argued that the wife was well-
educated, qualified, and capable of earning, and ought to engage in
gainful employment rather than seek maintenance from the husband.
Reference was made to her educational qualifications and the make-
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 24 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
up artist course pursued by her to contend that she had the ability to
earn an independent income. It was further submitted that courts
should be cautious in entertaining claims of maintenance by women
who, despite having the capacity to work, choose not to do so after
marriage and seek to sustain themselves on the earnings of the
husband.
Marital Expectations and Social Context in Indian Households
49. This Court notes that in many households in Indian society ,
it is still commonly expected that a woman, at the time of marriage,
either does not work or, even if she is employed, is persuaded or
compelled to give up her employment to devote her time to the
household, the family, and the upbringing of children. This
expectation is also witnessed even where the woman is educated and
otherwise capable of pursuing a career.
50. However, when matrimonial relations deteriorate and legal
proceedings ensue, it is frequently seen that the same husband
takes a starkly contrary position and contends that the wife is
well-qualified, capable of earning, and is deliberately choosing to
remain unemployed while seeking maintenance . Such a stand
cannot be encouraged. Where a husband has, either expressly or by
conduct, required or expected his wife to give up her employment
and assured her that he would take care of the financial needs of the
family, he cannot later disown that very understanding and shift the
entire burden upon the wife by contending that she ought to now
independently sustain herself.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 25 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
51. In the Indian social context, a woman who gives up
employment after marriage does so under a variety of circumstances
– some voluntary, some negotiated, and at times, compelled by
familial expectations or practical realities. At times, the decision to
discontinue employment may arise from relocation due to the
husband‟s transfer, the birth of a child, or the need to care for elderly
members of the family.
52. In the present case, the wife has stated before this Court that
she had appeared in certain examinations for bank clerk posts in the
year 2012 but did not pursue her career further after marriage, as she
was expected to remain at home and manage the household. Whether
such expectations were articulated expressly or evolved as part of the
marital understanding is a matter not to be seen or examined at this
stage; however, the reality remains that the wife did not pursue any
career during the subsistence of the marriage and till the time the
parties were living together. To now fault her for not working and
earning to sustain herself despite being qualified, without accounting
for the circumstances that led to such a position, would be unjust.
53. At the same time, this Court is mindful that where a woman is
educated, qualified, and employed, and voluntarily chooses to leave
her employment without any compelling circumstances, she must
remain conscious that such a decision may have practical
consequences . Marriage does not suspend economic realities, and
the law cannot, in every situation, insulate parties from the long-
term financial implications of choices made with open eyes . Each
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 26 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
case must, therefore, be examined on its own facts.
Practical Realities and Barriers to Re-entry into the Workforce after
Marital Breakdown
54. The Courts are also required to take judicial notice of the
practical difficulties associated with re-entering the workforce after a
prolonged break . A woman who has stepped away from her
profession due to marriage or family responsibilities cannot be
expected to resume employment at the same level, salary, or
professional standing merely because the marriage has broken
down between the parties after several years . Rapid technological
changes, evolving skill requirements, and competitive job markets
often place such women at a distinct disadvantage. A woman who
pauses her career for several years cannot simply resume from where
she left off. Skills may become outdated, professional networks
weaken, and age-related barriers become real. The assumption that
she can effortlessly re-enter the workforce ignores these practical
realities. Therefore, it would naturally be unrealistic and unfair to
assume that the wife would have the same employability restored the
moment she separates from her husband, particularly after a break of
several years.
55. This aspect has also been emphasised by the Hon‟ble Supreme
Court in Rajnesh v. Neha (supra), wherein it was held that in
marriages of long duration, where the wife, though educated and
professionally qualified, had to give up employment opportunities to
look after the family and children, such circumstances must be given
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 27 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
due weight. The Supreme Court recognised that in contemporary
society, a separated wife may require fresh training to acquire
marketable skills and rehabilitate herself in the workforce, and that
advancement in age further compounds the difficulty of re-entry after
a prolonged career break. These realities cannot be ignored while
assessing entitlement to maintenance.
The Myth of the ‘Idle’ Wife
56. It was also argued on behalf of the husband that the wife
cannot sit “idle” and claim maintenance.
57. This Court finds it necessary to address the notion, often
encountered while adjudicating maintenance proceedings, of the so-
called “idle woman”. While there is no quarrel with the proposition
that women who are able and willing to work should be encouraged
to pursue employment, the denial of maintenance on the sole ground
that a wife is capable of earning and should not remain dependent
upon her husband is a flawed approach. The capacity to earn and
actual earning are distinct concepts, and as per settled law, mere
capacity to earn cannot be a ground to deny maintenance . The real
test is whether the wife is actually earning . A different conclusion
may arise in cases where a wife, immediately before or after filing a
maintenance petition, gives up employment solely to claim
maintenance and without any apparent justification. In the present
case, the reasoning adopted by the learned Magistrate overlooks the
realities of domestic life and the responsibilities borne by a woman
within a household, particularly when a minor child is in her custody.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 28 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
58. The assumption that a non-earning spouse is “idle” reflects
a misunderstanding of domestic contribution . Managing a
household, caring for children, supporting the family, and adjusting
one‟s life around the career and transfers of the earning spouse are all
forms of work, even though they are unpaid and often
unacknowledged. To describe non-employment as idleness is easy;
to recognise the labour involved in sustaining a household is far
more difficult. These responsibilities do not appear in bank
statements or generate taxable income, yet they form the invisible
structure on which many families function.
59. Where one spouse earns income in the marketplace and the
other sustains the domestic sphere, the economic stability of the
household is the result of combined, though differently manifested,
contributions. A homemaker does not “sit idle”; she performs
labour that enables the earning spouse to function effectively. To
disregard this contribution while adjudicating claims of
maintenance would be unrealistic and unjust .
60. This Court is, therefore, unable to agree with any view that
equates non-employment of a wife with idleness or deliberate
dependence on the husband.
61. It must be remembered that while one spouse may bring in
monetary income, the other may invest time, effort, and opportunity
costs into sustaining the family structure. When the relationship
deteriorates and parties are compelled to approach the Court, one
seeking maintenance and the other resisting it, the contributions of
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 29 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
both must be weighed with fairness and balance. The law must
recognise not only financial earnings but also the economic value
of the contribution of the wife within the home and domestic
relationship during the subsistence of the marriage.
Conclusion: Wife is entitled to grant of interim maintenance
62. For the aforesaid reasons, this Court is of the view that the
present case is one where, at this stage, there is no material on record
to establish any past or present employment or earnings of the wife.
63. Further, the wife has also stated that when the husband left for
Kuwait in August 2020, leaving the wife and the minor son in India,
he had agreed to pay monthly maintenance to the tune of ₹1.25 lakhs.
The husband has himself averred that he was paying certain monthly
expenses towards the maintenance of the wife and the minor child.
The bank account statements placed on record clearly reflect that the
husband had transferred ₹50,000/- in one month and thereafter ₹1
lakh per month for three months towards “monthly expenses” to the
wife. The fact that such payments were being made by the husband
himself clearly indicates that the wife had no independent source of
income and was dependent upon the husband for her sustenance
during the said period.
64. In these circumstances, this Court is clearly of the view that the
wife has made out a case for grant of interim maintenance in her
favour, as there is no material on record to suggest that she is earning
any income sufficient to maintain herself or meet her day-to-day
expenses.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 30 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
B. Whether the income of the husband has been correctly assessed
and appropriately apportioned between the wife and the minor child
for the purpose of maintenance?
65. At the outset, it is not in dispute that the husband is employed
as a Drilling Engineer with Kuwait Oil Company, a Government-
owned entity under the Kuwait Petroleum Corporation, and has been
working in Kuwait since the year 2015. The affidavits of income and
assets filed by the husband, along with the documents placed on
record before the Courts below, clearly establish that he is a highly
qualified professional holding a B.Tech degree in Petroleum
Engineering and is earning a substantial income in foreign currency.
66. The salary slips and bank account statements placed on record
reveal that in the year 2021, the husband was earning about USD
5,100–5,420/- per month, which, at the prevailing exchange rate of
about ₹73 per USD at that time, translated to an income of about ₹4
lakhs per month in Indian currency. Subsequently, as per the salary
slip dated 06.02.2023, the husband‟s gross monthly salary stood at
USD 6,461/- which, at the average exchange rate of ₹82 per USD in
2023, comes to about ₹5.29 lakhs per month. Thus, there is no
manner of doubt that the husband‟s income has substantially
increased over time and that he is a person of considerable means.
67. The learned Appellate Court has also taken note of the fact that
while the husband disclosed one of his bank accounts maintained
with the National Bank of Kuwait, substantial portions of his salary
were being repeatedly transferred from that account to another
account held by him, the statement of which was not placed on
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 31 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
record. Additionally, the bank account statements of his HDFC Bank
account revealed the creation of multiple fixed deposits, cumulatively
running into more than ₹1 crore, as well as an advance of ₹10 lakhs
given by him as a loan to a third party. These financial transactions
demonstrate that the husband has not only a steady and high income
but also significant savings and surplus funds at his disposal.
68. In his affidavit, the husband has sought to project that he is
incurring monthly expenses to the tune of ₹3.46 lakhs, including
substantial EMIs towards a home loan in Kuwait and a flat in Noida,
besides other personal and household expenditures. However, the
plea of the husband that his net income must be assessed only after
deducting EMIs towards home loans, personal loans, insurance
premiums, rent, utilities, and other voluntary liabilities cannot be
accepted. It is well settled that while determining maintenance, only
statutory and compulsory deductions such as income tax and
mandatory social security contributions are liable to be excluded.
Voluntary financial commitments, including repayment of housing
loans or personal loans undertaken by the earning spouse at his own
discretion, cannot be permitted to dilute or defeat the statutory
obligation to maintain a dependent spouse and minor child.
69. In this regard, reliance may be placed on the judgment of the
Division Bench of this Court in Subhash v. Mamta @ Raksha:
MAT.APP.(F.C.) No.195/2025 , decided on 26.05.2025, wherein it
was categorically held that repayment of personal loans and EMIs
voluntarily undertaken by the earning spouse does not qualify as
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 32 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
permissible deductions and cannot override the primary obligation to
maintain a dependent spouse and child. The Court reiterated that
maintenance is required to be assessed on the basis of the “free
income” of the earning spouse, and not on the balance amount
remaining after accounting for voluntary deductions. The rationale is
that such liabilities are assumed by choice and cannot take
precedence over the duty to maintain wife and minor children as
imposed by law. Consequently, the argument raised on behalf of the
husband in this regard is devoid of merit and stands rejected.
70. At the same time, this Court is conscious of the fact that the
husband is residing and working in Kuwait, where the cost of living
is materially higher than in India. His reasonable expenditure towards
accommodation, food, transport, and utilities in the country of
employment cannot be ignored altogether and is required to be
factored in while determining the quantum of maintenance. In Bindu
Chaudhary v. Deepak Suga: 2016:DHC:6795-DB , the Division
Bench of this Court held that where a person is earning in a foreign
country ( Dubai, in the said case ), both his income and expenditure
are in that currency, and it would not be appropriate to mechanically
convert his income into Indian currency without considering the cost
of living in the country of employment.
71. For the same reason, in cases where the husband is earning
abroad in a country with a higher cost of living, the rigid application
of the apportionment principle laid down in Annurita Vohra v.
Sandeep Vohra: 2004 SCC OnLine Del 192 may not be apposite.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 33 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
Each case must be assessed on its own facts, keeping in view the
overall financial capacity of the husband, the needs of the wife and
child, and the standard of living to which they were accustomed.
72. This Court also notes from the material placed on record that
prior to the initiation of the present litigation, the husband had been
voluntarily transferring amounts towards the maintenance of the wife.
The bank account statements reflect that for a few months, the
husband had paid an amount of ₹1 lakh per month to the wife
towards “monthly expenses”. This also demonstrates that the husband
had the financial capacity to pay such amounts at the relevant time
and was conscious of his obligation to maintain the wife and the
minor child. The same also belies the plea taken by the husband that
after meeting his personal and other family expenses, he is left with
very meagre surplus income.
73. In view of the above discussion, this Court is of the opinion
that in the present case, the learned Family Court, while adjudicating
the proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. – and after taking
into account the husband‟s admitted income, his place of
employment, his claimed expenses, and the absence of any reliable
material to establish independent earnings of the wife, and granting
interim maintenance of ₹50,000/- per month to the wife and
₹40,000/- per month to the minor child – has adopted a balanced
approach.
74. In the above background, this Court is thus unable to accept
the argument of the husband that, despite admittedly earning in the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 34 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
range of ₹5–6 lakhs per month, he can refuse to pay any maintenance
to his wife, while asserting that he is “somehow managing” to pay
only ₹10,000/- per month towards the child‟s expenses along with
school fees. Accepting such a submission would defeat the very
purpose of the law relating to maintenance.
75. This Court also finds it apposite to observe that while grant of
maintenance is often described as a measure to prevent destitution
and vagrancy, and that undoubtedly remains one of its core purposes,
yet the concept of maintenance cannot be viewed in such narrow
terms alone. Particularly in a matrimonial setting, maintenance also
serves to ensure that a spouse who does not have an independent
source of income is not reduced to a position of economic
vulnerability while the other continues to enjoy financial stability.
76. Where a wife is not working, is managing the household,
caring for a minor child and/or the elderly of the family, and the
husband has a steady and substantial income, the grant of
maintenance is rooted in the principle of equity between the parties.
Maintenance, in such cases, is meant to place both parties at
reasonably comparable levels so that each is able to sustain a
dignified life.
77. When a marital relationship breaks down, the law must ensure
that the spouse who invested time, effort, and years into building the
family is not left economically stranded. A marriage is not only a
personal relationship but also a partnership in which each spouse
contributes in different ways. One may earn income outside the
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 35 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
home, while the other supports the family by managing the
household, raising children, and enabling the earning spouse to
pursue and sustain a career. If, after the breakdown of such a
relationship, the non-earning spouse is left without financial support,
the balance of that partnership is disturbed. Award of maintenance to
the spouse seeks to correct that imbalance by recognising the
contribution made within the family, even though it may not have
been in the form of a salary.
78. The law, therefore, has to step in to ensure that the spouse who
invested in the family is not pushed into financial hardship merely
because the marriage has come to an end.
C. Final Quantum of Maintenance
79. In view of the findings recorded hereinabove, this Court is of
the considered view that the conclusions arrived at by the learned
Magistrate and the learned Appellate Court in the proceedings under
the PWDV Act, insofar as they deny interim maintenance to the wife,
are erroneous and unsustainable, and are liable to be set aside.
80. Whereas, this Court finds no infirmity in the order passed by
the learned Family Court in the proceedings under Section 125 of the
Cr.P.C. whereby interim maintenance of ₹50,000/- per month was
awarded to the wife and ₹40,000/- per month to the minor child. The
said quantum has been determined after a proper appreciation of the
material on record, the financial capacity of the husband, and the
needs of the wife and the minor child, and calls for no interference.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 36 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
81. In order to ensure uniformity, avoid overlapping of
maintenance orders, and to harmonise the relief granted under the
PWDV Act and Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., this Court holds that
interim maintenance of ₹50,000/- per month to the wife and
₹40,000/- per month to the minor child shall be payable also under
proceedings under PWDV Act. To this extent, the enhancement of
maintenance to ₹60,000/- per month granted to the minor child by the
learned Appellate Court in the proceedings under the PWDV Act is
reduced to ₹40,000/- per month, and the orders of learned Magistrate
and learned Appellate Court are set aside qua denial of maintenance
to the wife and maintenance of ₹50,000/- is awarded in favor of the
wife in proceedings under PWDV Act.
82. It is further directed that the aforesaid amounts of ₹50,000/-
per month to the wife and ₹40,000/- per month to the minor child
shall be payable from the date of filing of the respective
applications/petitions before the Court concerned.
83. This Court is also guided by the principles laid down by the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha (supra) , wherein it has
been held that where maintenance is claimed under different statutes,
the Court must ensure adjustment or set-off of the amounts awarded
or paid in parallel proceedings. Accordingly , it is directed that any
amount already paid or payable by the husband towards maintenance
in either of the proceedings shall be duly adjusted and set off against
each other.
84. Accordingly, the orders passed by the learned Magistrate and
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 37 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
the learned Appellate Court under the PWDV Act stand modified to
the aforesaid extent, and the order passed by the learned Family
Court under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. stands upheld.
85. However, the observations made in this judgment are solely for
deciding the present petitions, and shall not influence the merits of
the case during trial.
86. Let the arrears of maintenance be cleared by the husband
within a period of 6 months from date.
87. Insofar as the issues relating to alleged non-disclosure of LIC
policies and other financial assets, including fixed deposits, raised by
both the husband and the wife in CRL.M.A. 35130/2025 and
CRL.M.A. 35710/2025, along with the prayers seeking initiation of
perjury proceedings against each other, are concerned, this Court is
not inclined to pass any order thereon, as it is presently dealing only
with the issue of interim maintenance. The parties are left at liberty to
raise all such issues before the concerned Trial Courts at the
appropriate stage.
Mediation, not Litigation
88. Before parting with this judgment, this Court also finds it
necessary to acknowledge the manner in which maintenance
proceedings often become intensely adversarial. Once matrimonial
disputes reach the courtrooms, both the parties begin to approach the
litigation as a contest to be won rather than a problem to be resolved.
The emotional strain of a broken relationship frequently spills over
into the court proceedings, which makes it difficult for initiation of a
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 38 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11
dialogue between the parties.
89. Another tendency which cannot be ignored is that in such
contested proceedings, the wife may at times overstate her monthly
expenses, while the husband often understates his income or pleads
financial incapacity. Courts are then left to sift through competing
versions, which prolongs the cases pending before the Courts This
adversarial approach rarely serves the long-term interests of either
party, and least of all those of minor children who are directly
affected by prolonged disputes.
90. In this backdrop, this Court is of the view that mediation,
rather than continued litigation, offers a more constructive path
forward in matrimonial disputes. Mediation, undoubtedly,
provides a better space for meaningful dialogue, realistic assessment
of needs and capacities of both the husband and the wife, and
mutually acceptable solutions.
91. In view of the above, the present petitions, along with all
pending applications, are disposed of.
92. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.
DR. SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J
FEBRUARY 16, 2026/ns
T.D./T.S.
Signature Not Verified
CRL.REV.P. 718/2024 and connected matters Page 39 of 39
Digitally Signed
By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN
Signing Date:19.02.2026
17:10:11