Supreme Court Expresses Shock At HC Order Reducing Maintenance For Wife As Merely Rs.1,000 Per Month

Recently, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing an appeal, expressed shock at the impugned judgment of the Jharkhand High Court, whereby the maintenance amount of Rs. 5,000, awarded by the Trial Court, was reduced to Rs. 1,000, per month. The Court further opined that it finds no justification for reducing the amount to such an extremely low limit.

“It is shocking that the maintenance amount has been so drastically reduced to a petty amount of Rs. 1,000/- (Rupees One Thousand) per month for a lady to maintain herself”, Justices Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah stated.

In view of the same, while setting aside the impugned order, the Court restored Trial Court’s order awarding Rs. 5,000/ per month as maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Brief Background

Before the High Court, the husband (respondent) had filed a criminal revision against the order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Girigih, wherein ex-parte maintenance of Rs.5000/- per month to the wife(petitioner).

Therein, the respondent argued that the order was passed without due service of notice and without hearing him. He further averred that he is a poor priest in a village temple and earns his livelihood by part-time tuition. Therefore, he is not in a position to make a payment of Rs.5000/- per month. On the other hand, the petitioner contended that it is not true that the order was passed in ignorance of the respondent. As a matter of fact, both parties had appeared before the Mediation Centre. Thereafter, she was subjected to cruelty and had to leave her matrimonial home.

After hearing the arguments, the High Court ordered:

“From the reason of the impugned order, it appears that the learned Court below has awarded the maintenance by assessing the income of the petitioner to be Rs.25,000/- per month from his occupation of priesthood and tuition. A further income of Rs. 5 Lakh per annum from agriculture has also been stated without any documentary evidence to show that the petitioner was having agricultural land in his name. Assessment of income of Rs.25,000/- per month by tuition appears to be highly unrealistic considering the semi urban area in which the petitioner was living. A fair estimate of income cannot be more than Rs.5000/- to Rs.7000/- per month.”

The High Court, for the order above, placed its reliance on Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324, wherein it was held the Court must consider the parties’ status and the spouse's capacity to pay for her or his support. Maintenance is dependent upon factual situations; the Court should mould the claim for maintenance based on various factors brought before it.

Click here to read the order