In a ruling examining the standard of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Patna High Court has held that ₹7,000 per month cannot be considered excessive, describing it as an “absolutely meagre” amount in light of present living costs. Justice Bibek Chaudhuri, while dismissing a revision petition filed by a fruit seller husband, observed that the law places emphasis not on declared income but on the earning capacity of an able-bodied husband when determining maintenance.
The case arose from a petition filed by the wife, which culminated in an order of the Family Court directing her husband to pay ₹7,000 per month as maintenance. Challenging this, the husband contended that he earned no more than ₹3,000 per month from selling fruits on a cart, and therefore lacked sufficient means to comply. He further argued that he had expressed willingness to maintain his wife at home with dignity, and that her refusal to live with him disentitled her to maintenance.
Opposing these contentions, counsel for the wife submitted that the petitioner earned between ₹20,000 and ₹25,000 monthly through his fruit business. The Family Court, assessing his earning potential, fixed the monthly allowance at ₹7,000, which it held was not excessive.
The Court observed, “It is not the actual income but the capacity of the husband to earn is the prime consideration while granting maintenance allowance in favour of the wife.” On the inadequacy of the amount itself, the Court observed, “Rs. 7,000/- per month today is absolutely a meager amount for maintenance of a person. More than Rs. 3,000/- is spent per month for one person for having absolutely frugal meal twice today. Thereafter, there are expenditure for clothing, medicine and other bare requirements of life of the opposite party.”
Lastly, the Court found the petitioner to be an able-bodied man engaged in trade and capable of meeting the liability, and therefore upheld the Family Court’s order while dismissing the revision petition.
Picture Source :
