Court Upholds Maintenance for Minor Child; Family Court Judge to Explain Oversight
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has set aside a maintenance order granted to a woman who remarried after divorce, asserting that she is no longer entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The judgment was delivered by Justice Praveen Kumar Giri in the case of Rajesh Chaturvedi v. State of U.P., emphasizing judicial accountability and the legal precedents regarding maintenance entitlements post-remarriage.
The case revolved around the revision petition filed by Rajesh Chaturvedi, challenging the maintenance order dated March 10, 2026, which required him to pay Rs. 10,000 per month to his ex-wife, Smt. Swati Agaria. The revisionist contended that the maintenance order was unjust as his ex-wife had remarried shortly after the divorce decree was finalized on July 30, 2025. The remarriage, which took place on September 3, 2025, was disclosed in various legal proceedings, including a counter affidavit submitted by the wife in a related appeal.
Despite the submission of evidence regarding the remarriage, the Additional Principal Judge of the Family Court in Jhansi had directed Mr. Chaturvedi to continue paying maintenance to his ex-wife. The High Court found this decision flawed, as the provision under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. explicitly excludes a divorced wife from claiming maintenance once she remarries.
Justice Giri expressed concern over the Family Court's oversight and has requested an explanation from the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhansi, for this error. The High Court has issued a notice to the judge to clarify why the remarriage fact was ignored while passing the maintenance order.
The court also addressed the issue of maintenance for the minor child of the couple. Mr. Chaturvedi expressed his willingness to comply with the order regarding his minor son, agreeing to pay Rs. 5,000 per month for his upkeep. The court's decision thus ensures financial support for the child while rectifying the legal error concerning the wife's maintenance.
The case underscores the importance of judicial diligence and adherence to statutory provisions, as well as the necessity for courts to thoroughly evaluate all pertinent facts before issuing orders. The High Court's directive for an explanation from the Family Court judge highlights the judiciary's commitment to maintaining accountability within its ranks.
The matter is scheduled for further proceedings on July 21, 2026, with instructions for the police and court officials to communicate the order promptly to the involved parties. The Registrar (Compliance) has been tasked with ensuring the orders are conveyed to the relevant authorities, including the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi.
Bottom line:-
Wife who has remarried after divorce is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C.; maintenance to minor child is permissible and revisionist expressed willingness to comply with such order.
Statutory provision(s): Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Rajesh Chaturvedi v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2937556
