Bombay High Court Revises Family Court's Maintenance Order for Adult Daughters

Court clarifies maintenance laws, limiting post-majority financial support under Cr.P.C. Section 125

In a significant judgment, the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench, presided over by Justice Vrushali V. Joshi, has modified a previous Family Court order that granted maintenance to two daughters after they had reached the age of majority. The ruling clarified the application of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), stating that maintenance cannot be extended to adult children unless they are physically or mentally unable to support themselves.

The case, Kashinath v. Sou. Pushpa and others, involved a challenge to the Family Court's decision requiring the applicant, Kashinath, to continue paying maintenance to his daughters despite them being adults. The Family Court had initially mandated Kashinath to provide Rs. 3,000 per month to each daughter from the date of the petition and subsequently Rs. 5,000 per month following the order, until they married or started earning independently.

Kashinath's legal counsel argued that under Cr.P.C. Section 125, maintenance is exclusively for minor children or those who are incapacitated due to physical or mental conditions. The daughters in question did not fall under these categories, prompting the request for modification of the Family Court's ruling.

Justice Joshi acknowledged the misapplication of Section 125 by the Family Court, emphasizing that the provision does not permit maintenance for daughters who have attained majority unless they are unable to maintain themselves due to specific disabilities. The court referenced the Supreme Court's decision in Abhilasha v. Prakash, which delineates the legal grounds for maintenance claims by adult children under different statutes.

The judgment distinguished between the provisions of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. and Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. While the former restricts maintenance for adult children to cases of physical or mental incapacity, the latter allows unmarried daughters to claim maintenance enforcing their rights, as affirmed by higher judicial precedent.

Consequently, the Bombay High Court partially allowed Kashinath's revision application, modifying the maintenance order to cover only the period until the daughters reached the age of majority. This decision reinforces the legal framework governing maintenance and underscores the necessity for precise adherence to statutory provisions.

Bottom Line:

Section 125 of Cr.P.C does not permit granting maintenance to children who have attained majority unless they are physically or mentally abnormal or injured and unable to maintain themselves.

Statutory provision(s): Section 125 of Cr.P.C., Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956

Kashinath v. Sou. Pushpa, (Bombay)(Nagpur Bench) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2805330