Provisions of Maintenance of Wives, Children and
Parents under Section 125 of CrPC
Introduction----
Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 is a significant legal provision that mandates a
person to maintain his wife, children, and parents if they are unable to maintain themselves. It serves
as a tool for social justice and is applicable irrespective of religion or personal laws, being a secular
provision. It aims to prevent vagrancy and destitution by legally obligating family members to support
those dependent on them.
Objective of Section 125 CrPC---
Provide quick remedy:-To provide speedy and inexpensive remedy to the neglected wife,
children, and aged parents.
Prevent destitution and vagrancy:-To protect the rights of dependents and prevent them from
facing poverty and homelessness.
Securing welfare responsibility:-To uphold the constitutional mandate of Article 15(3) and
Article 39 of the Indian Constitution which aims at securing welfare of women and children.
Entitled person in respect of maintenance _---
1. Wife:
A legally wedded wife who is neglected or refused maintenance.
Includes a divorced wife who has not remarried.
A wife in a live-in relationship may also claim maintenance under certain circumstances
(Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse, 2014).
2. Children:
Legitimate or illegitimate minor children, married or unmarried.
Major children who are physically or mentally challenged.
A child, including a daughter until she marries, is entitled to maintenance.
3. Parents:
Natural or adoptive parents, including biological mother and father.
Parents must be unable to maintain themselves to claim maintenance from their earning children.
Conditions for Grant of Maintenance--
Sufficient means :-The person from whom maintenance is sought must have sufficient means to
support.
Neglect or Refusal:-There must be evidence of neglect or refusal to maintain the claimant.The
wife should not be living in adultery or refuse to live with her husband without sufficient reason.
Inability to maintain:-The claimant must be unable to maintain themselve.
If the couple is living separately by mutual consent, the wife is not entitled to maintenance.
Quantum of Maintenance--
Reasonable need:-The court has discretion to decide the amount of maintenance based on the
income, standard of living, and liabilities of the person liable. There is no fixed limit; the court
considers reasonable needs of the claimant.
The Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha (2020) emphasized the need for uniformity and directed
parties to submit affidavits of income and expenditure.
Interim maintenance--
The provision also note down the interior maintenance for Claimant. Interior maintenance is a
temporary relief granted by the court while the application for final maintenance is pending. This is
crucial in cases where the claimant has an urgent need for financial support and cannot wait for
conclusion of legal proceeding. The court will consider interim of maintenance
Procedure under Section 125--
Petition can be filed before a Magistrate of First Class.
Proceedings are summary in nature to ensure swift relief.
Upon failure to comply, the court can issue a warrant and order imprisonment up to one month or
until payment is made (Section 125(3)).
Enforcement and Modification of Orders--
Section 126 provides the procedure for hearing.
Section 127 allows modification, enhancement, or cancellation of the maintenance order if
circumstances change.
Section 128 allows the enforcement of the order in any place where the person liable resides.
Landmark Case Laws--
1. Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008):
The Supreme Court held that the wife is entitled to maintenance even if she is capable of earning
but is not actually earning.
The term "unable to maintain herself" does not mean that the wife must be absolutely destitute.
2. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985):
A historic judgment where the Supreme Court granted maintenance to a Muslim woman under
Section 125, asserting that the provision applies to all irrespective of religion.
Led to the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.
3. Badshah v. Urmila Badshah Godse (2014):
The court ruled in favor of a woman in a live-in relationship, recognizing her right to maintenance.
Held that social justice and equity must guide the interpretation of laws.
4. Rajnesh v. Neha (2020):
The Supreme Court issued comprehensive guidelines to streamline maintenance proceedings.
Directed both parties to file detailed affidavits about income, assets, and liabilities to decide a fair
amount.
5. Kirtikant D. Vadodaria v. State of Gujarat (1996):
Held that a stepmother is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125.
Clarified the scope of the term "mother" under this provision.
6. Vijaya Manohar Arbat v. Kashirao Rajaram Sawai (1987):
Recognized that a daughter, including a married one, is liable to maintain her parents.
Expanded the responsibility beyond sons, ensuring gender equality.
Conclusion
Section 125 CrPC ensures economic protection for dependent wives, children, and aged parents. It
provides a legal shield against destitution and enforces the duty of family members to support each
other. It is a powerful measure for achieving social justice and upholding human dignity within the
family system.
