Supreme Court Restores Interim Maintenance Award for Minor Daughters in Section 125 CrPC Case. High Court's Reduction Set Aside Because Wife's Earnings Alone Did Not Halve Father's Shared Maintenance Obligation.

Case Note & Summary

The appeal arose from a matrimonial dispute where the appellant-wife and her two minor daughters sought maintenance from the respondent-husband under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The marriage was solemnised on 18 June 2006, and two daughters were born. A son born to the parties passed away shortly after birth. Acrimony developed, and the appellants left the marital home. In 2022, the appellants filed Case No.355/2022 seeking maintenance of Rs.2,50,000 per month. The appellant-wife, an M.B.B.S., D.G.O. qualified gynaecologist, stated she earned Rs.1,50,000 per month working at a hospital in Greater Noida. The respondent-husband, M.B.B.S., M.D. qualified, stated he earned Rs.2,00,000 per month as a consultant paediatrician, though the appellant-wife contended he owned his own nursing home. The Family Court awarded interim maintenance only to the two minor daughters at Rs.30,000 per month each and declined interim maintenance to the appellant-wife, reasoning that both parties were earning sufficient income and interim maintenance is meant to protect a party from unemployment or immediate inability to meet daily needs. The respondent-husband filed a revision before the High Court. The High Court partly allowed the revision and reduced the interim maintenance to Rs.15,000 per month per daughter, holding that a sum of Rs.60,000 per month would be sufficient for both daughters but that the burden could not be fastened solely upon the father because the mother was also earning. The appellants challenged this reduction before the Supreme Court. The core legal issues were whether the High Court erred in reducing the interim maintenance solely due to the wife's income, whether the shared parental obligation could be divided arithmetically, and whether the quantum was just and reasonable. The appellants argued that the High Court erred in reducing the amount despite acknowledging the children's tender age and their need for proper care and upbringing; the educational and upbringing expenses were considerable and could not be met from the wife's income alone; and the husband earned far in excess of Rs.2,00,000 per month. The respondent-husband supported the impugned order, contending that responsibility for maintaining daughters rests on both parents and the wife, being gainfully employed, was equally placed to bear a share of expenses. The Supreme Court held that the wife's earning alone was not a reason to halve the father's liability; the obligation to maintain children is shared but cannot be divided by arithmetic alone. The daughters lived with the mother, who looked after their daily needs and upbringing while also working; such care could not be measured in money but was a real contribution. Even leaving aside the wife's earnings, the reduction could not stand because the husband earned Rs.2,00,000 per month and Rs.60,000 per month was not a large amount for two school-going daughters aged about nine and eight years. The Court found that the Family Court had correctly appreciated the status of the parties and the needs of the minor daughters after considering income affidavits and expenses, and the award of Rs.30,000 per month per daughter, aggregating to Rs.60,000 per month, was just and reasonable. The Court also noted that the main petition under Section 125 CrPC was still pending, concerning only interim maintenance. Accordingly, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order dated 9 February 2026, restored the Family Court's order dated 21 October 2024, directed arrears to be paid within three months, and stated that the main application under Section 125 CrPC should be decided on its own merits without being influenced by findings in the interim orders. The appeal was allowed.

Headnote

Issue of Consideration

Final Decision

Appeal allowed. Impugned order dated 09.02.2026 passed by the High Court set aside; Family Court order dated 21.10.2024 restored. Arrears payable by respondent-husband to appellant-wife within three months. Main application under Section 125 CrPC to be decided on its own merits without being influenced by findings in the interim orders.

Law Points