The Madras High Court ruled that under Section 125 CrPC, a man has both a legal and moral duty to maintain his wife and mother for life, recognising their irreplaceable role and invaluable lifelong contribution.
The Madras High Court at the Madurai Bench declined to intervene in a Family Court ruling that mandated a man and his two sons to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.21,000 to his estranged wife.
The court emphasized that maintaining a wife and mother is both a legal obligation and a moral duty.
The court stated,
“It is the social responsibility of the husband and sons to maintain their wife and mother, as the invaluable role and care of a mother cannot be compensated, no matter how much her children pay her back in a lifetime. Moreover, no amount of payment can ever bear the pain and sacrifices that a mother endured at the time of their birth,”
Justice Shamim Ahmed, leading the bench, dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by R. Ananda Prakash and his sons, A. Ashwin and A. Gururaj, which contested the Family Court’s order from March 18, 2025.
This order had granted maintenance to Ananda Prakash’s wife, A. Malarvizhi, under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The couple married on January 7, 1986, and lived together until 2015, when, according to the petitioners, Malarvizhi voluntarily left their home. In 2019, four years after their separation, she approached the Family Court seeking a monthly allowance of Rs.40,000, the return of 290 sovereigns of gold ornaments given during their marriage, and recovery of Rs.5 lakh allegedly owed to her.
The Family Court, however, limited the relief to maintenance, ordering a monthly payment of Rs.21,000. Against this ruling, the husband and sons filed a revision petition with the High Court, arguing that the order was unjust.
The petitioners’ counsel asserted that Ananda Prakash, now over 60 years old, suffers from health issues and lacks independent income. His elder son, Ashwin, struggles to manage household expenses, including his father’s medical costs, while Gururaj, who works in Bengaluru, often requires financial support. They contended that Malarvizhi was not destitute and had sufficient means to support herself, citing her ownership of a car and her employing a driver.
Furthermore, they claimed she chose to live separately without valid reasons and thus was not entitled to maintenance.
The petitioners expressed their willingness to provide for her needs at home, arguing that the Family Court had not properly considered their circumstances.
The High Court, however, rejected these claims, highlighting that the responsibility of supporting a wife and mother is not only a legal duty but also a moral and social obligation that cannot be shirked.
The judge remarked,
“It is a well-established principle that it is a man’s legal and moral duty to maintain his mother/wife during her lifetime. This responsibility stems from the inherent obligation of children to care for their parents. Similarly, it is the duty of the husband and children to provide for the wife and mother during her old age, ensuring she is supported and cared for,”
The court further stated that prioritizing a mother’s well-being is a fundamental aspect of familial duty and societal values. By fulfilling this duty, individuals can ensure that their mothers live their later years with dignity and care.
The court emphasized that Section 125 of the CrPC is a protective measure designed to safeguard women from destitution and vagrancy. It noted that, given the rising costs and inflation, the award of Rs.21,000 per month is not excessive or disproportionate. Finding no illegality or impropriety in the Family Court’s decision, the bench upheld it entirely.
Section 125 CrPC, 1973
- Provides for maintenance of wives, children and parents.
- It says if any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain:
- His wife (unable to maintain herself),
- His legitimate/illegitimate minor child,
- His legitimate/illegitimate child (adult but unable to maintain due to physical/mental abnormality), or
- His father or mother (unable to maintain themselves),
then a Magistrate may order a monthly allowance.
Consequently, the High Court dismissed the revision petition and directed the Family Court in Madurai to proceed in accordance with the law.
Case Title: R.Ananda Prakash and Ors vs A.Malarvizhi
Read Attachment