The Delhi High Court on Wednesday dismissed two connected criminal revision petitions filed by estranged spouses Geeta and Nishant Tyagi, both challenging a 2022 order of the Karkardooma Family Court. While the wife sought maintenance for herself, the husband contested the direction to pay ₹16,000 per month for their minor daughter's upkeep.
Background
Geeta and Nishant married in 2009 under Hindu rites. A daughter was born to them in August 2010. Soon after, disputes erupted. Geeta alleged that she faced physical, mental, and financial harassment at the hands of her husband and in-laws. Forced to leave the matrimonial home, she moved in with her mother and approached the Family Court under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), demanding ₹30,000 per month - ₹20,000 for herself and ₹10,000 for the child.
Read also:- Andhra Pradesh High Court Enhances Compensation to ₹8.55 Lakh in Violent Property Dispute Case
In 2022, the Family Court partly allowed her plea: the child was awarded ₹16,000 per month until she marries or becomes self-sufficient, but the wife’s claim was rejected.
Court's Observations
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, while hearing both sides, revisited the Family Court’s findings. The bench noted that Geeta had admitted to being employed as a temporary teacher in Uttar Pradesh, drawing around ₹10,000 per month. More crucially, her earlier salary slip from 2016 reflected an income of ₹33,052, and her income tax return for 2017–18 disclosed an annual income exceeding ₹4 lakh.
Read also:- Supreme Court Orders Coal India to Refund 20% Excess Charges Collected Under 2006 Interim Coal Policy
Despite opportunities, she did not produce updated salary slips or Form-16 records to establish her present financial hardship.
"The wife concealed her actual income and withheld the most relevant documents," the judge remarked, concurring with the Family Court’s adverse inference.
On the husband’s challenge against paying ₹16,000 for the child, the Court was firm. Nishant, employed with Northern Railways, admitted to a monthly income of nearly ₹58,000, including agricultural earnings.
The Judge observed,
"A child’s right to maintenance is independent of the disputes between her parents. The father is bound to maintain the children."
Rejecting his plea of financial strain, the Court held that one-third of his income towards the child was neither excessive nor unfair.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Upholds Family Court Order, Grants ₹25,000 Interim Maintenance to Estranged Wife and Child
The Decision
Concluding the matter, Justice Sharma said there was no illegality or perversity in the Family Court’s order. Both petitions - Geeta’s plea for her own maintenance and Nishant’s attempt to reduce child support—were dismissed.
With this, the High Court left the 2022 maintenance arrangement intact: no monetary relief for the wife, but a steady ₹16,000 every month for the daughter's care.
Case Title:- Smt. Geeta & Anr. vs. The State & Anr.
Case No.:- CRL.REV.P. 395/2022
