The Allahabad High Court partly allowed a criminal revision, reducing maintenance awarded to a wife and child from Rs 11,000 to Rs 7,500 monthly. The Court held maintenance must be “reasonable and proportionate” to income, considering the husband’s assessed monthly earnings of Rs 30,000.
PRAYAGRAJ: The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad has partly allowed a criminal revision petition, lowering the maintenance awarded earlier to a wife and child. Justice Madan Pal Singh observed that while a husband is legally bound to support his family, the maintenance must be “reasonable and proportionate” to his earnings.
The dispute concerned whether the Family Court’s monthly maintenance award of Rs 11,000 was excessive given the husband’s financial capacity. The High Court assessed the revisionist’s income at Rs 30,000 per month and, applying Supreme Court guidance, reduced the combined maintenance to Rs 7,500 per month.
Backgrounds:
The revisionist, Sarfaraj, challenged an order dated January 24, 2025, of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra. In Maintenance Case No. 617 of 2019, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the trial court had directed payments of Rs 7,000 per month to the wife (Opposite Party No. 2) and Rs 4,000 per month to the child (Opposite Party No. 3).
For the revisionist: Counsel Jai Raj submitted that the revisionist works as a laborer in his brother’s shop, earning only Rs 8,000–Rs 9,000 monthly. He argued there is no steady income source and that the revisionist bears other financial liabilities. He contended the trial court’s award conflicted with established precedents, citing:
- Rajnesh vs. Neha and Another (2021) 2 SCC 324
- Kalyan Dey Chowdhury vs. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy AIR 2017 SC 2383
- Kulbhushan Kumar vs. Raj Kumari (1970) 3 SCC 129
For the opposite parties: Counsel Vinod Chandra Yadav and the A.G.A. for the State opposed the revision, arguing that in view of current inflation the Rs 11,000 award was not excessive and was within the revisionist’s capacity, and that the petition should be dismissed.
Court’s reasoning:
The Court accepted the marriage as undisputed. On income, noting the revisionist’s claim of employment in his brother’s shop (previously his father’s) but the absence of documentary proof, the Court made a pragmatic assessment:
“In the absence of reliable proof, his income is assessed at Rs.1,000/- per day which comes to Rs. 30,000/- per month from all sources.”
Relying on Supreme Court guidance that maintenance may be up to 25% of the husband’s net income, the Court calculated 25% of Rs 30,000 to be Rs 7,500.
It held:
“It is true that it is the legal obligation of a husband to maintain his wife and child; however, the amount of maintenance must be reasonable and proportionate to his income. Therefore, the maintenance awarded by the court below appears to be excessive and deserves to be modified.”
The High Court reduced the total monthly maintenance from Rs 11,000 to Rs 7,500, apportioned as:
- Rs 4,000 per month to the wife (Opposite Party No. 2)
- Rs 3,500 per month to the child (Opposite Party No. 3)
The revised maintenance is payable from the date of the original application. Any amounts already paid by the revisionist shall be adjusted. Arrears are to be cleared in 20 equal monthly installments, the first installment being due on or before April 10, 2026.
Case Title: Sarfaraj vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others CRIMINAL REVISION No. 1116 of 2025
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
