Maintenance Denied to Working Woman under Section 125 CrPC

Source: Allahabad High Court

Why in News? 

Justice Madan Pal Singh of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Ankit Saha v. State of U.P. and Another (2025) set aside the family court's order directing the husband to pay Rs. 5,000 per month as maintenance to his wife, holding that she was able to maintain herself and had not approached the court with clean hands.

What was the Background of Ankit Saha v. State of U.P. and Another (2024) Case? 

• The wife (Neha Sahu) filed an application under Section 125 CrPC before the Family Court, Gautam Budha Nagar, seeking maintenance from her husband. 
• In her application and affidavit, the wife claimed she was illiterate, unemployed, and had no source of income or means to maintain herself. 
• The wife stated in her affidavit that her liabilities were "nil" and presented herself as being in financial distress. 
• During proceedings, the husband produced documents showing that the wife was actually a Post-Graduate, qualified as a Web Designer, and was working as a Senior Sales Coordinator in Keiath Telecom Pvt. Ltd. 
• When confronted with these documents during cross-examination, the wife admitted she was earning Rs. 36,000 per month (initially claimed Rs. 34,000 in her affidavit). 
• The Family Court, despite acknowledging the wife's employment and income, awarded maintenance of Rs. 5,000 per month "to balance the income between the parties" and make them of equal status. 
• The husband filed a criminal revision before the Allahabad High Court challenging this order, arguing the wife had sufficient means to maintain herself and had suppressed material facts. 
• The husband also submitted he had the responsibility of maintaining his aged parents, whereas the wife had no such liabilities.

What were the Court's Observations? 

• The Court noted that the wife was a well-educated, earning professional with a monthly salary of Rs. 36,000, which cannot be considered meagre for someone with no other liabilities. 
• The Court observed that the trial court failed to consider the husband's liability of maintaining his aged parents and other social obligations while awarding maintenance. 
• Justice Singh emphasized that as per Section 125(1)(a) CrPC, maintenance can only be awarded to a wife who is "unable to maintain herself," which was not the case here. 
• The Court found that the wife did not approach the trial court with clean hands, as she deliberately concealed her educational qualifications, employment status, and income in her application and affidavit. 
• The Court held that the wife's claim of being illiterate and unemployed in her application, when she was actually a Post-Graduate earning Rs. 36,000 monthly, amounted to suppression of material facts. 
• Citing the principle that "when a person approaches a Court, he should approach the Court not only with clean hands but also with clean mind, clean heart and clean objective," the Court held such conduct cannot be rewarded. 
• The Court referenced the Supreme Court judgment in Rekha Sharad Ushir v. Saptashrungi Mahila Nagari Sahkari Patsansta Ltd. (2025), which held that a litigant who suppresses material facts or makes false statements cannot seek justice from the court. 
• The Court ruled that the wife's suppression of material facts was sufficient ground to deny her any sympathy or entitlement to maintenance. 
• The Court set aside the Family Court's order and allowed the criminal revision, thereby denying maintenance to the wife. 

What is Section 125 CrPC (Now Section 144 BNSS)? 

About: 

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was a provision for maintenance of wives, children, and parents who are unable to maintain themselves. 
• With the implementation of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, Section 125 CrPC has been replaced by Section 144 BNSS. The provision has been adopted essentially as-is, maintaining the same core content and purpose. 
• It is a measure of social justice designed to prevent vagrancy and destitution by ensuring that those unable to maintain themselves receive financial support from their relatives. 
• The provision applies regardless of the personal law governing the parties and is a secular law applicable to all citizens. 

Section 144 BNSS:

• Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) is a social justice provision aimed at preventing destitution and financial hardship of a neglected spouse and children. It empowers a Magistrate of the First Class to grant monthly maintenance, interim maintenance, and proceeding expenses to the wife, legitimate or illegitimate child, who is unable to maintain themselves, from a person who has sufficient means but refuses or neglects to do so. 

Key statutory Features: 

• Section 144(1): Empowers the Magistrate to order monthly maintenance to wife and children. 
• Second Proviso to Section 144(1): Allows the Magistrate to grant interim maintenance and expenses during the pendency of proceedings. 
• Third Proviso to Section 144(1): Directs that interim maintenance applications should ideally be disposed of within 60 days from the date of service of notice. 
• Section 144(2): Maintenance may be payable either from the date of application or order, as the Magistrate deems fit. 
• Section 144(3): Non-payment of maintenance can attract warrant proceedings and imprisonment up to one month. 
• Section 144(4): Disqualifies the wife from receiving maintenance in cases of adultery, refusal to live with husband without sufficient cause, or mutual consent to live separately. 
• Further procedural clarity is offered under Section 145(2), which mandates that evidence must be recorded in the presence of the respondent or their advocate, with a provision for ex parte proceedings and setting aside such orders upon showing sufficient cause within three months.