Seeking Enhanced Maintenance After Blocking Husband's Pension Amounts To 'Abuse Of Law': Calcutta High Court

While dismissing a wife’s plea for enhanced maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the Calcutta High Court on Monday observed that the wife's plea praying for enhancement of maintenance after blocking a substantial source of the husband’s income amounts to an abuse of process of law.

Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) underscored,

“This is a case where a wife blocks a substantial source of income of the husband and then claims an enhancement of maintenance, a really difficult situation for the husband. This clearly amounts to an abuse of process of law and is also against the interest of Justice. Both the parties are equal in the eye of law and the court has to ensure that none of the parties suffer injustice.”

The Court was essentially adjudicating upon a revision petition filed against an order of the concerned Judicial Magistrate wherein the petitioner (wife) had been granted a sum of Rs 4000 per month as maintenance for herself and a sum of Rs 3000 per month as maintenance for her minor daughter.

The petitioner had filed an application before the concerned Judicial Magistrate under Section 125 of the CrPC praying for maintenance of Rs. 20,000 per month for herself and Rs. 5000 per month for her daughter.

Pursuant to a perusal of the record, the Court noted that the husband is a former employee of the Indian Air Force and that his pension had been blocked due to a complaint filed by the petitioner with the Air Force authorities.

As a result, the Court observed that this has caused a huge reduction in the amount of income received by the husband and thus the amount of maintenance that is to be granted to the petitioner must also be proportionately affected.

“It is for the petitioner to take necessary steps to ensure that the pension from the Air Force is released in favour of the opposite party so that the prayer for enhancement of maintenance for the petitioner can be considered. The opposite party cannot be burdened, when it is the conduct of the petitioner herself because of whom the pension from the Air Force has been blocked”, the Court remarked further.

Accordingly, the Court ruled that the amount of maintenance granted to the petitioner's wife remains unchanged subject to the final adjudication by the concerned trial court as to whether the petitioner has left her matrimonial home without just and sufficient reasons.

The trial court was also directed to rely upon the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Rajnesh vs. Neha for the computation of the quantum of maintenance.

The Court however revised the amount granted for the maintenance of the minor daughter by exercising its inherent powers after observing that the amount of Rs 3,000 per month is clearly not sufficient to maintain a school-going child.

Case Title: Shilpi Lenka v. Susanta Kumar Lenka & Anr.

Case citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Cal) 19

Click Here To Read/Download Order