The Allahabad High Court held that a daughter-in-law is not legally required to maintain her parents-in-law under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS. The Court clarified that moral responsibility cannot be treated as a legal obligation unless the law specifically provides for it.
In an important ruling, the Allahabad High Court at Prayagraj has held that a daughter-in-law is not legally required to maintain her parents-in-law under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which is now Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
The Court made it clear that while there may be a moral duty, it cannot be enforced as a legal duty unless the law specifically provides for it.
Justice Madan Pal Singh, while deciding the matter, explained that the right to claim maintenance is a statutory right and only those persons who are clearly mentioned in the law can claim maintenance under this provision. The Court stated that parents-in-law are not included in the list of persons who can claim maintenance from a daughter-in-law under Section 125 CrPC or Section 144 BNSS.
The Court clearly observed,
“The legislature, in its wisdom, has not included parents-in-law within the ambit of the said provision. In other words, it is not the scheme of the legislature to fasten liability of maintenance upon a daughter-in-law towards her parents-in-law under this provision.”
The case came before the High Court after an elderly couple, Rakesh Kumar and his wife, filed a criminal revision petition challenging an order passed in August 2025 by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra. The family court had rejected their application in which they had sought maintenance from their daughter-in-law under Section 144 of BNSS.
The elderly couple argued that they were old, illiterate, poor, and were fully dependent on their son during his lifetime. After their son’s death, they claimed that their daughter-in-law, who is working as a constable in the Uttar Pradesh Police, has a stable income and is financially capable of maintaining them.
They also argued that she had received all the service benefits of their deceased son and therefore she should be legally bound to maintain them. They further argued that even if not legally, her moral responsibility to maintain her aged parents-in-law should be treated as a legal responsibility.
However, the High Court did not accept this argument. The Court noted that there was no material on record to show that the daughter-in-law got her job in the police on compassionate grounds after the death of her husband. This
point was important because if the job had been given on compassionate grounds, the situation might have been legally different in certain circumstances. Since there was no such proof, the Court refused to accept the claim of the parents-in-law.
The Court also clarified that issues related to property, succession, or service benefits of the deceased son cannot be decided in maintenance proceedings under Section 125 CrPC or Section 144 BNSS. Such issues must be decided separately under the appropriate law and forum.
With these observations, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the criminal revision petition filed by the elderly couple and upheld the order of the Family Court, Agra, thereby confirming that under the present law, a daughter-in-law is not legally bound to provide maintenance to her parents-in-law under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS unless the law is amended to include such a provision.
Click Here to Read More Reports on Sealing Mosque
