Court Rejects Enhancement Plea, Finds Trial Court's Maintenance Award Reasonable and Realistic
In a recent decision, the Allahabad High Court, presided over by Justice Madan Pal Singh, dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by Smt Neetu Tyagi, seeking an enhancement of the maintenance allowance awarded by the trial court. The judgment, dated February 27, 2026, upheld the trial court's order which mandated a monthly maintenance of Rs. 2,000 for Neetu Tyagi, considering it reasonable and realistic.
The case, initially decided by the Principal Judge of the Family Court in Muzaffarnagar, involved the application of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, which pertains to maintenance allowances. The revisionist, Smt Neetu Tyagi, had contested that the awarded amount was insufficient to cover her daily expenses amidst rising inflation. In contrast, the opposing counsel argued that the trial court's decision was fair, given the financial condition and income of the opposite party.
The High Court relied on precedents set by the Supreme Court in the cases of Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) and Kulbhushan Kumar (Dr) v. Raj Kumari (1970), which guide the courts to ensure that maintenance allowances are neither too meagre nor excessively burdensome on the payer. The judgment emphasized that the maintenance should not exceed 25% of the net income of the husband, a benchmark which the trial court adhered to in its decision.
The court also addressed the revisionist's claim regarding the opposite party's alleged income from agricultural land, dismissing it due to a lack of documentary evidence. The judgment noted that the opposite party earns Rs. 5,000 per month working at a medical shop, a fact acknowledged by the revisionist herself.
In conclusion, the High Court found no legal infirmities in the trial court's decision, affirming that the maintenance amount was justified and dismissing the revision petition. This judgment reinforces the judicial principle of balancing the financial realities of both parties in maintenance cases.
Bottom Line:
Maintenance allowance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. should be reasonable and realistic, avoiding extremes - neither so meagre as to drive the wife and children to penury nor so extravagant as to become oppressive to the husband.
Statutory provision(s): Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Smt Neetu Tyagi v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2863048
