MP High Court Says Salary Slips Are Crucial Before Fixing Maintenance Under Section 125 CrPC
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that courts must ascertain the actual income of the earning spouse through reliable documentary evidence, including salary slips, before determining maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (now substantially reflected in Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita). The Court observed that maintenance cannot be fixed on assumptions or by applying a uniform amount retrospectively without examining the husband’s actual earnings during the relevant period.
Justice Amit Seth made the observations while deciding cross-revision petitions arising from a Family Court order that had awarded a wife ₹20,000 per month as maintenance from the date of filing of her application in 2016. The husband, a Sub-Engineer with the Municipal Corporation, Gwalior, argued that the Family Court had incorrectly applied the same amount retrospectively, despite his salary being substantially lower in the initial years of the litigation.
The High Court agreed that while maintenance should ordinarily be awarded from the date of filing of the application, the amount payable for the retrospective period must correspond to the husband’s actual net salary during each financial year. It emphasized that salary slips and income records are essential to determine a fair and realistic quantum of maintenance, particularly in long-pending proceedings where the earning spouse’s income changes over time.
Accordingly, the Court upheld the wife’s entitlement to maintenance but modified the Family Court’s order by directing that the maintenance payable from February 2016 to March 2024 be recalculated proportionately based on the husband’s yearly net salary. It noted that applying the present maintenance amount uniformly to earlier years would have resulted in the husband paying nearly 45% to 67% of his then salary, which was disproportionate and contrary to the object of maintenance law.
The Bench further observed that maintenance proceedings are intended to ensure that a spouse unable to maintain herself can live with dignity comparable to the matrimonial standard of living. At the same time, the determination must remain equitable and should take into account the paying spouse’s actual financial capacity rather than presumed income. Documentary proof such as salary slips, income statements and service records therefore plays a vital role in ensuring that maintenance orders are both just and sustainable.
The ruling reinforces the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha that maintenance should ordinarily be awarded from the date of filing, while clarifying that the quantum for earlier years cannot be mechanically fixed without reference to the payer’s actual earnings during the relevant period. The judgment is expected to guide Family Courts in adopting a more evidence-based approach while assessing maintenance claims under Section 125 CrPC and the corresponding provisions of the BNSS.
