The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a criminal revision filed by a Chartered Accountant husband challenging a Family Court order directing him to pay Rs. 20,000 per month as maintenance to his wife from the date of application under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
Background of the Case
The parties were married on 12 February 2013 according to Hindu rites. The wife (opposite party no. 2) filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. in 2017 alleging cruelty, harassment, and neglect by the husband and his family on account of non-fulfilment of dowry-like demands for money to purchase a flat. She claimed she was compelled to live separately due to mental and physical cruelty.
The Family Court, Mainpuri, after detailed examination of evidence, partly allowed the application and directed the husband to pay Rs. 20,000 per month from 17 June 2017 (date of filing).
Key Issues
- Whether the wife had sufficient reason to live separately and whether the husband neglected or refused to maintain her.
- Quantum of maintenance – Whether Rs. 20,000 per month was excessive considering the husband’s alleged irregular income and the wife’s educational qualifications.
High Court’s Analysis and Ruling
Justice Garima Prashad upheld the Family Court’s findings after careful scrutiny of oral and documentary evidence:
On Cruelty and Separate Residence:
- The Court found sufficient evidence of pressure on the wife and her widowed mother to arrange money (including Rs. 5.5 lakhs received for a flat booked through SBI loan).
- Medical records showed injuries sustained by the wife while residing with the husband. The husband gave inconsistent explanations (slip in bathroom, bedroom, staircase, etc.), which were rightly viewed with suspicion.
- The husband filed divorce proceedings shortly after the wife left the matrimonial home and showed no genuine effort to reconcile. Baseless allegations against the wife’s character and mental condition in divorce proceedings were also noted as relevant.
- Mediation records indicated the wife was willing to cohabit, while the husband was not.
On Financial Capacity and Quantum:
- The husband is a qualified Chartered Accountant with experience in multiple places (Noida, Kanpur, Lucknow, etc.) and has undertaken consultancy work.
- He owned a Honda City car and had incurred expenses on air travel and hotel stays with the wife.
- He had earlier disclosed earning Rs. 90,000 per month. No reliable evidence (IT returns, bank statements, etc.) was produced to prove substantial decline in income.
- Adverse inference was rightly drawn for withholding best evidence regarding his income.
- The wife’s educational qualifications (M.Sc., B.Ed.) alone do not disentitle her from maintenance in the absence of proof of sufficient independent income. No cogent evidence of her earnings from tuition/coaching was produced.
- The amount of Rs. 20,000 per month was held just, reasonable, and not disproportionate considering the husband’s professional status and lifestyle.
The High Court emphasised that in revisional jurisdiction, interference is warranted only in cases of patent illegality or perversity. No such ground existed here.
Key Takeaways
- In proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the focus is on preventing destitution. Educational qualifications of the wife do not automatically bar maintenance unless actual sufficient income is proved.
- A husband, especially a professional like a Chartered Accountant, cannot evade liability by merely claiming irregular income without producing reliable financial documents.
- Inconsistent explanations regarding injuries and baseless character allegations against the wife strengthen the case for separate residence and maintenance.
- Maintenance can be awarded from the date of application where circumstances justify.
Case Details
Case Name: Alok Tiwari v. State of U.P. and Another
Citation: Criminal Revision No. 5768 of 2024
Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Coram: Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Garima Prashad
Date of Judgment: 17 June 2026
Click HERE for full Judgment.
Lawcutor 