The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set aside a Family Court order granting monthly maintenance of ₹15,000 to a woman and her minor son, holding that maintenance cannot be determined on assumptions about the parties' income. The Court ruled that salary slips and reliable financial records are essential before fixing maintenance and sent the matter back to the Family Court for fresh consideration.
Background of the Case
The criminal revision was filed by husband Rishabh Shrivastava, challenging the Family Court's order dated July 8, 2024. The Family Court had directed him to pay ₹10,000 per month to his wife Smt. Ritu Shrivastava @ Pinki Shrivastava and ₹5,000 per month to their minor son under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Before the High Court, the husband argued that the Family Court ignored his salary slip showing a monthly income of ₹24,332 and instead presumed that he earned ₹50,000 every month. He also contended that although his wife admitted earning ₹6,000 per month, she had failed to produce any salary slip to support that claim.
The wife and minor son defended the Family Court's decision but acknowledged that no salary slip of the wife had been placed on record.
Court's Observations
Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal agreed with the Family Court's finding that the wife was living separately for sufficient cause and found no reason to interfere with that conclusion.
However, the Court found serious flaws in the assessment of income while fixing maintenance.
The bench observed,
"In absence of any pay slip of the respondent/wife, the Family Court has committed an illegality in accepting the income of the respondent/wife to be Rs.6,000 per month... and has also committed an illegality in presuming the income of the petitioner/husband to be Rs.50,000 per month."
The High Court noted that both spouses were employed. The wife had disclosed that she was working as a Library Assistant in a government college but had not produced the salary documents required under the Supreme Court's decision in Rajnesh v. Neha. On the other hand, the husband's salary slip showing a monthly income of ₹24,332 was already available on record.
The Court emphasized that if the Family Court had doubts about the authenticity of the husband's salary slip, it could have directed him to produce the original or a fresh salary certificate instead of estimating his earnings. Likewise, the wife should have been required to submit her current salary records before her income was assessed.
Decision
Allowing the revision in part, the High Court set aside the Family Court's maintenance order and remanded the matter for fresh adjudication. It directed the Family Court to restore the maintenance proceedings and decide them afresh after obtaining proper evidence regarding the financial status of both parties. The parties have been directed to appear before the Family Court on August 18, 2026.
As an interim arrangement, the High Court directed the husband to continue paying ₹10,000 per month with effect from July 1, 2026, while clearing arrears up to June 30, 2026, at the earlier rate of ₹15,000 per month until the Family Court passes a fresh order.
Case Details
- Case Title: Rishabh Shrivastava v. Smt. Ritu Shrivastava @ Pinki Shrivastava and Others
- Case Number: Criminal Revision No. 4116 of 2024
- Judge: Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal
- Decision Date: July 17, 2026
