The Madhya Pradesh High Court has enhanced the maintenance payable to a wife and her minor daughter, observing that maintenance is not merely about survival but also includes the right to live with dignity. The Court held that a husband's claim of voluntarily paying certain expenses cannot reduce his legal obligation to support his wife and minor child.
Justice Gajendra Singh passed the order while partly allowing a revision petition filed against a Family Court decision from Neemuch.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose from a maintenance application filed by the wife and her minor daughter under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 22 February 2024.
The wife alleged that she had been subjected to cruelty and neglect and claimed that her husband had sufficient means but failed to provide adequate financial support. She sought maintenance for herself and her daughter.
The husband denied the allegations and argued that he was already bearing substantial expenses for the education of the couple's elder son, who was pursuing a B.Tech degree in Jaipur. He also contended that he had other family responsibilities and had taken steps to restore marital relations.
After examining the evidence, the Family Court awarded ₹5,000 per month to the wife and ₹2,000 per month to the minor daughter from the date of the application.
Dissatisfied with the amount, the wife and daughter approached the High Court seeking enhancement.
Court's Observations
During the hearing, the High Court examined the husband's salary records, which showed that he was employed as a government school teacher with a net monthly salary of approximately ₹72,915.
The Court noted that the daughter was studying in a senior secondary school and that the husband had paid only certain school fees while other educational and personal expenses were not being met.
Observing the importance of educational support for children, the Court said:
“Children pursuing school education cannot be left at the mercy of the parents.”
The Court further emphasized that voluntary payment of educational expenses does not replace a father's statutory duty to maintain his wife and minor daughter.
Justice Singh also remarked:
“The wife and daughter of a government servant cannot be compelled to survive merely on the mercy of the husband.”
The Court found that the husband's expenditure on the education of his major son could not be used as a reason to restrict reasonable maintenance for the minor daughter. It also observed that a minor daughter deserves priority consideration and that maintenance must ensure a dignified standard of living.
“The expression ‘maintenance’ includes the right to live with dignity,” the Court observed.
Decision
Considering the husband's income, the educational needs of the minor daughter, and the increasing cost of living, the High Court concluded that the amount awarded by the Family Court was inadequate.
The Court partly allowed the revision petition and enhanced the monthly maintenance payable to the wife from ₹5,000 to ₹7,500. The maintenance payable to the minor daughter was increased from ₹2,000 to ₹10,000 per month.
The enhanced amounts were directed to be paid from 22 February 2024, the date on which the original maintenance application was filed.
The Court also directed that any amount already deposited by the husband be adjusted accordingly.
Case Details
Case Title: Madhu and Others v. Hemendra Kumar
Case Number: Criminal Revision No. 4655 of 2025
Judge: Justice Gajendra Singh
Decision Date: 29 May 2026
