/images/ppid_a911dc6a-image-177505310297330693.webp)
The Allahabad Court has observed that a husband cannot use his responsibilities towards parents and siblings as a reason to avoid maintaining his wife. The court’s observation came while dismissing a criminal case filed by a railway employee challenging an increase in maintenance awarded to his wife and minor son by a Family Court in Etawah.
Earlier, the Family Court had increased the monthly maintenance for the wife from Rs 3,500 to Rs 8,000, and for the minor son from Rs 1,500 to Rs 4,000. However, the man had argued that the increased amount was way more than his financial capacity, according to a report by Live Law.
A bench led by Justice Vinod Diwakar rejected his plea, noting that the Family Court had acted appropriately after considering
all relevant factors, including the husband’s income, the social standing of the parties, and the needs of the wife and child.
The petitioner, employed as a Group-D Railway Keyman, submitted that he earns around Rs 55,000 per month and must also bear the expenses of his aged parents. He further argued that he supports his unmarried siblings, which places an additional financial burden on him.
However, the High Court was not persuaded. It observed that an income of Rs 55,000 per month cannot be considered insufficient to comply with the enhanced maintenance order.
Justice Diwakar further mentioned that only because the revisionist has certain familial obligations would not absolve him of his primary responsibility to maintain his legally wedded wife’s well-being.
The court stressed that maintenance laws are social welfare provisions aimed at ensuring that a wife can live with dignity, in line with the financial capacity and status of her husband.
Highlighting the limited scope of its revisional jurisdiction, the bench concluded that there was no illegality or error in the Family Court’s order and accordingly dismissed the revision petition.
