Maintenance Order Sustained as Just Where Able-Bodied Husband Fails to Rebut Presumption of Sufficient Means

The petitioner (husband) challenged an order dated 24.07.2024 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran, in Maintenance Case No. 230 of 2018.

The lower court had directed the petitioner to pay ₹6,000 per month to his wife (Opposite Party No. 2) starting from 04.07.2018, with arrears to be cleared within six months.

The petitioner initially failed to file the revision in time due to Jaundice, leading to a delay of 75 days.

He argued that the wife left him voluntarily, his income was only ₹6,000 per month as a medical shop employee, and that the children were allegedly residing with him in a house he transferred to their names.

1. Whether the delay of 75 days in filing the criminal revision should be condoned.

2. Whether the maintenance award of ₹6,000 per month was erroneous given the petitioner’s alleged income and the living situation of the children.

Section 125 of the CrPC regarding a husband's obligation to maintain his wife and children.

An "able-bodied person" is presumed to have sufficient earning capacity to maintain his dependents.

Labour Department’s notifications regarding minimum wages (approximately ₹600-700 per day) as a benchmark for determining a petitioner's constructive income when no formal income documents are produced.

The Court first condoned the 75-day delay via I.A. No. 01 of 2026, accepting the medical grounds (Jaundice) as sufficient cause.

The Court rejected the petitioner's claim that the children resided with him, noting that his own evidence and trial records confirmed the three children resided with the mother.

The Court observed that the petitioner failed to produce documentary evidence of his actual income.

Applying the minimum wage standards, the Court reasoned that even as an able-bodied laborer, the petitioner's income would exceed his claims. Furthermore, it noted that ₹6,000 per month is a "very meager amount" for the maintenance of a wife and three children combined.

The Court dismissed the revision petition and affirmed the order of the Family Court. The petitioner is required to pay the monthly maintenance of ₹6,000 and clear the arrears as directed.