Source: Calcutta High Court 

Why in News? 

Recently, Justice Bibhas Ranjan De  held that Maintenance is to be granted not as mere subsistence but to ensure continuity and stability of the lifestyle post-separation. 

• The Calcutta High Court held this in the matter of Tumpa Basak vs. Tufan Basak (2025). 

What was the Background of Tumpa Basak v. Tufan Basak, Case? 

• Tumpa Basak (Wife/Petitioner) and Tufan Basak (Husband/Opposite Party) were lawfully married and a male child was born out of their wedlock. 
• The parties subsequently experienced distressing matrimonial discord leading to their separation and breakdown of the marital relationship. 
• Following the matrimonial breakdown, the wife initiated proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) seeking maintenance for herself. 
• The court granted maintenance in favour of the wife to the tune of Rs. 30,000/- per month after due consideration of the circumstances. 
• The husband subsequently retired from his service as a High Level Banking Official, which constituted a material change in circumstances affecting his financial capacity. 
• Considering his retirement, the husband filed an application under Section 127 CrPC seeking reduction of the maintenance amount from Rs. 30,000/- to a lesser sum. 
• The Learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Barrackpore, North 24 Parganas disposed of this application by reducing the maintenance from Rs. 30,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- per month vide order dated 30.12.2023.

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Court observed that income tax returns cannot be considered as conclusive proof of an individual's actual income, as such returns are primarily based on information provided by the taxpayer himself. 
• The figures reported in tax returns are subject to the taxpayer's understanding and interpretation, which may not always be accurate, comprehensive, or reflective of true financial capacity. 
• There exists a perpetual possibility of under-reporting in tax returns, making the actual income of an individual substantially different from the figures shown therein. 
• Courts must look beyond Income Tax returns while determining income in maintenance proceedings and should examine potential earnings, past earnings, and assets of the maintenance payer. 
• The Court observed a drastic change in society regarding marital obligations in present times, demanding a corresponding change in judicial approach towards maintenance grants. 
• Maintenance is no longer merely a hand-out to barely cover subsistence but has evolved into a tool to preserve lifestyle stability and represents continuity of living rather than compensation for separation. 
• Post-separation maintenance should mirror the lifestyle of the wife during the period of married life, and women who have devoted years to domestic responsibilities deserve to maintain comparable life after separation.

What is Section 144 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 ? 

• Any person having sufficient means who neglects or refuses to maintain his wife unable to maintain herself, his legitimate or illegitimate children unable to maintain themselves, or his father or mother unable to maintain themselves can be compelled to provide maintenance. 
• A Magistrate of the first class may, upon proof of such neglect or refusal, order monthly allowance for maintenance at such rate as the Magistrate deems fit and direct payment to such person as appropriate. 
• Maintenance extends to legitimate or illegitimate children who have attained majority but are unable to maintain themselves due to physical or mental abnormality or injury, excluding married daughters. 
• During pendency of proceedings, the Magistrate may order interim maintenance for wife, child, father or mother along with expenses of proceeding, with applications to be disposed of within sixty days. 
• For the purposes of this Chapter, "wife" includes a woman who has been divorced by or has obtained divorce from her husband and has not remarried. 
• Maintenance allowance shall be payable from the date of order or from the date of application if so ordered, and non-compliance may result in warrant for recovery and imprisonment up to one month. 
• No wife shall be entitled to maintenance if she is living in adultery, refuses to live with husband without sufficient reason, or they are living separately by mutual consent. 
• If husband has contracted marriage with another woman or keeps a mistress, it constitutes just ground for wife's refusal to live with him, and Magistrate may grant maintenance despite husband's offer for cohabitation.

Case Referred  

• Kusum Sharma v. Mahinder Kumar Sharma, 2015 
  • Establish that maintenance should reflect the dignity and standard of living the wife was accustomed to during marriage. 
• Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan, (2015) 
  • Support the principle of equi status in maintenance determination. 
• Dr. Avnish Pawar v. Dr. Sunita Pawar, II (2000) 
  • To establish that maintenance should be reasonable and proportionate to the husband's actual income.