Legal provisions involved: Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 144 of BNSS)
Judgement by: Allahabad High Court
Judge/Bench: Justice Madan Pal Singh
Facts
Kamla Devi filed a maintenance case against her husband, Hiralal, before the Family Court at Pilibhit. The Family Court ordered Hiralal, a young practising lawyer, to pay ₹5,000 per month as maintenance. Hiralal challenged this order in the High Court, stating that he had only recently started practising law and did not have a fixed or regular income.
Key legal provisions:
Section 125 CrPC (Section 144 of BNSS, 2023)
Issues raised
- Whether a newly practising advocate with uncertain income can be directed to pay a maintenance amount that is beyond his actual earning capacity.
Arguments of the case
Hiralal argued that his earnings were irregular and very low, sometimes ₹300–400 a day and sometimes nothing, making ₹5,000 per month difficult to pay. The wife and the State claimed that he earned well, owned property, and could afford the amount fixed by the Family Court.
Judgement
The High Court noted that it is common knowledge that lawyers in the early years of district court practice struggle financially. Since there was no proof of a stable income, the court held that the Family Court fixed an excessive amount. The maintenance was reduced to ₹3,750 per month from the date of application. Any amount already paid would be adjusted, and pending arrears were directed to be paid in instalments.
Click here to VIEW the full judgement.
