Logo

Divorce Doesn't End Wife's Right to Maintenance If She Hasn't Remarried and Unable to Maintain Herself: Allahabad HC Enhances Monthly Support to ₹20k

Shivam Y.

The Allahabad High Court enhanced a divorced wife's maintenance to ₹20,000 per month, holding that divorce alone does not end her right to maintenance if she has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself.

Advertisement
Divorce Doesn't End Wife's Right to Maintenance If She Hasn't Remarried and Unable to Maintain Herself: Allahabad HC Enhances Monthly Support to ₹20k
Join Telegram

The Allahabad High Court has increased the monthly maintenance payable to a divorced woman from ₹12,000 to ₹20,000, observing that the purpose of maintenance is to ensure a woman lives with dignity and not merely survives. The Court also reiterated that a decree of divorce alone does not take away a wife's right to claim maintenance if she has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself.

Justice Achal Sachdev delivered the judgment while deciding two connected criminal revisions filed by the wife seeking enhancement of maintenance and the husband challenging the Family Court's maintenance order.

Advertisement

Background of the Case

The dispute arose from proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), where Smt. Pinki Alias Preeti sought maintenance from her husband, Jai Prakash. She claimed that after their marriage in February 2010, she was subjected to cruelty and harassment over alleged dowry demands and was ultimately compelled to live separately at her parental home.

The Family Court at Kanpur Dehat, by an order dated August 31, 2024, directed the husband to pay ₹12,000 per month as maintenance from the date of filing of the application, along with litigation expenses. Dissatisfied, the wife approached the High Court seeking enhancement, while the husband filed a separate revision challenging the grant of maintenance itself.

Court's Observations

The High Court noted that the wife had filed the affidavit relating to her income, assets and liabilities in line with the Supreme Court's directions in Rajnesh v. Neha, whereas the husband had failed to submit a similar affidavit. The Court observed that the available material showed the wife had no independent source of income, while the husband's salary records reflected a gross monthly salary of ₹86,674 and a net bank credit of ₹67,043.

Referring to the Supreme Court's decision in Vanamala v. H.M. Ranganatha Bhatta, the Court emphasized that a woman does not lose her entitlement to maintenance merely because a decree of divorce has been granted, provided she has not remarried or is not otherwise disqualified under law.

The bench observed,

"The mere grant of a decree of divorce does not disentitle a woman, who was the legally wedded wife... from claiming maintenance so long as she has not remarried. The object of maintenance is to ensure that the wife is able to live with dignity and not merely survive."

The Court also discussed the Supreme Court's ruling in Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury Nee Nandy, clarifying that awarding around 25% of the husband's net income as maintenance is only a broad guideline and not a mandatory formula. The amount must depend on the facts of each case.

Reason for Enhancement

Justice Sachdev found that the maintenance awarded by the Family Court was inadequate in view of the prevailing cost of living and the husband's earning capacity.

The Court observed,

Advertisement
"Keeping in view the prevailing rate of inflation, the amount of maintenance awarded... is neither just nor adequate for her sustenance and is not commensurate with the standard of living to which she is entitled."

The Court further held that the husband had failed to establish that the wife had deserted him or that she had remarried, circumstances that could have affected her entitlement to maintenance.

Court's Decision

Allowing the wife's criminal revision, the Allahabad High Court enhanced the monthly maintenance from ₹12,000 to ₹20,000 with effect from November 26, 2021, the date on which the maintenance application was filed before the Family Court.

The Court dismissed the husband's revision, holding that there was no illegality or perversity in the Family Court's decision granting maintenance and that no interference was warranted.

Both revisions were disposed of accordingly.

Case Details

Case Title: Smt. Pinki Alias Preeti v. State of U.P. and Another (Connected with Shri Jai Prakash v. State of U.P. and Another)

Case Number: Criminal Revision No. 7753 of 2025 (Connected with Criminal Revision No. 5226 of 2024)

Judge: Justice Achal Sachdev

Decision Date: July 10, 2026

Advertisement

Take CourtBook Everywhere

Access your account on the go with our mobile app.

Get it on Google PlayDownload on the App Store
CourtBook Mobile App

Recommended Posts