Maintenance in Hindu and Muslim Law: A Comprehensive Analysis

Meaning and Scope of Maintenance in Family Law in India

Maintenance in family law refers to the legally mandated financial support provided to dependents who are unable to maintain themselves due to economic vulnerability. This includes wives, husbands, minor and major children, elderly parents, widowed daughters-in-law, and other legal dependents recognized under the law. Maintenance is not merely an act of charity; it is both a statutory obligation and a moral duty, ensuring the dependent’s right to live with dignity, basic sustenance, and social security within the family structure.

In India, the law relating to maintenance is governed by a combination of personal laws and secular statutes, designed to address the needs of different communities and family relationships. The primary legal provisions include:

• Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) – Deals with interim maintenance (alimony pendente lite) and permanent alimony between spouses during and after matrimonial proceedings such as divorce, judicial separation, or annulment.
• Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) – Provides for the maintenance of wives, children, aged parents, and other dependents within the Hindu family, recognizing a wider network of familial responsibility.
• Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – A religion-neutral, summary remedy that enables wives, children, and parents to claim essential monetary support to prevent destitution and vagrancy.
• Muslim personal law principles – Govern maintenance rights of Muslim wives and dependents as recognized under Sharia-based norms and judicial precedents, including rights to mehr, iddat maintenance, and in certain cases, post-divorce support.

Collectively, these legal provisions aim to prevent destitution and safeguard family welfare, women’s rights, and child support in India. They also reflect the broader constitutional commitment to social justice, ensuring that vulnerable family members are not left without financial protection and a reasonable standard of living.

Maintenance under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Sections 24 & 25)

The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA) provides a two-tier framework of financial relief between spouses: interim maintenance during matrimonial proceedings under Section 24, and permanent alimony / maintenance after a decree under Section 25. These provisions are intended to protect the financially weaker spouse and to ensure that matrimonial litigation does not result in economic destitution or denial of effective access to justice.

Section 24: Interim Maintenance (Pendente Lite)

Section 24 of the HMA deals with maintenance pendente lite (during the pendency of proceedings) and expenses of proceedings. It is a gender-neutral provision and can be invoked by either the husband or the wife.

Scope and Applicability

• Applies in any proceeding under the HMA (e.g. restitution of conjugal rights, judicial separation, divorce, nullity).
• Either spouse may apply if he or she has no independent income sufficient for support and to meet litigation expenses.
• The provision is designed to ensure that lack of money does not prevent a spouse from effectively prosecuting or defending matrimonial litigation.

Conditions for Grant of Interim Maintenance

• The applicant must show that he or she:
  • Is a party to a pending proceeding under the HMA; and
  • Does not have sufficient independent income for support and necessary litigation expenses.
• The court considers, among other things:
  • Income, earning capacity and assets of both parties;
  • Reasonable monthly needs and lifestyle of the applicant;
  • Existing financial obligations of the respondent;
  • Any special circumstances (illness, dependents, location, cost of living, etc.).
• The order is discretionary, and the court seeks to balance the need of the applicant with the paying capacity of the respondent.

Nature and Duration of Relief

• Interim maintenance is payable during the pendency of the case; it ordinarily ceases when a final decree is passed.
• The court may also direct the respondent to pay a lump sum towards litigation expenses at the outset or in stages.
• The statute directs that, as far as possible, the application under Section 24 be disposed of within 60 days from service of notice on the respondent.
• The order is generally considered interlocutory, though questions may arise about appealability depending on local practice and High Court precedent.

Key Practical Points under Section 24

• Either spouse (including a husband) can seek interim maintenance if genuinely in financial need.
• The fact that the validity of the marriage is disputed does not, by itself, bar the grant of maintenance if the relationship and dependence are prima facie shown.
• Courts often distinguish between necessary living expenses and purely voluntary or luxurious expenditure by the respondent.
• Parties must provide full and candid disclosure of income and assets; suppression or false statements can adversely affect the outcome.
• Amounts awarded under Section 24 may serve as a benchmark when the court later considers permanent alimony under Section 25.

Section 25: Permanent Alimony and Maintenance

Section 25 of the HMA deals with permanent alimony and maintenance. It enables the court to grant long-term financial relief to either spouse, in the form of periodic payments or a lump-sum amount, after a decree is passed under the Act.

When and to Whom It Is Available

• Relief under Section 25 can be granted at the time of passing any decree under the HMA or at any time thereafter on application.
• Available in cases of:
  • Restitution of conjugal rights,
  • Judicial separation,
  • Divorce,
  • Nullity (void or voidable marriage) and other decrees under the Act.
• Both husband and wife can seek permanent alimony or maintenance, making the provision formally gender-neutral.

Factors Considered in Granting Permanent Alimony

The court exercises a wide discretion but is guided by certain established factors, including:

• Income and earning capacity of both parties;
• Movable and immovable property and other financial resources of both parties;
• Standard of living enjoyed during the subsistence of the marriage;
• Age and health of the spouses;
• Duration of the marriage and nature of the relationship;
• Responsibilities towards children or other dependents;
• Conduct of the parties, including any proven matrimonial wrongs, to the extent relevant;
• Any other circumstances which, in the opinion of the court, render it just to grant or refuse relief, or to fix a particular quantum.

Form and Security of Relief

• The court may order either:
  • A gross lump-sum amount, or
  • Monthly or periodical payments for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant.
• To secure payment, the court may create a charge over immovable property of the respondent, if necessary.
• The form of relief (lump sum vs. periodic) is often chosen having regard to stability of income, age, health, and the possibility of future disputes.

Variation and Termination

• Under Section 25(2), if there is a change in the circumstances of either party after an order of permanent alimony has been made, the court may:
  • Vary the amount upward or downward,
  • Modify the terms, or
  • Rescind (cancel) the order.
• Under Section 25(3), the court may vary, modify or rescind the order if:
  • The party in whose favour the order was made has remarried; or
  • If that party is the wife, she has not remained chaste; or
  • If that party is the husband, he has had sexual intercourse outside wedlock.
• These provisions indicate that permanent alimony is not immutable and can be revisited where equity and justice so require.

Comparison between Sections 24 and 25

Landmark Case: Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2024)

A significant recent development in the law relating to maintenance under the HMA is the decision of the Supreme Court of India in Sukhdev Singh v. Sukhbir Kaur (2024). The case dealt with the crucial question whether a spouse in a void marriage is entitled to claim maintenance and alimony under Sections 24 and 25 of the HMA.

Key Issues Before the Court

• Whether the expression “any decree” in Section 25 includes a decree of nullity of marriage (void marriage) under Section 11 of the HMA.
• Whether a spouse to a void marriage can claim interim maintenance under Section 24 and permanent alimony under Section 25.
• Whether denying maintenance solely because the marriage is void is compatible with the constitutional right to dignity under Article 21.

Ruling and Principles Laid Down

• The Supreme Court held that the expression “any decree” in Section 25 is wide enough to include a decree declaring a marriage void under the HMA.
• Consequently, even in a void marriage, the matrimonial court may, in appropriate cases, grant:
  • Interim maintenance under Section 24; and
  • Permanent alimony / maintenance under Section 25.
• The Court emphasized that Sections 24 and 25 are beneficial and remedial provisions intended to protect the economically weaker spouse and cannot be interpreted in a narrow, technical manner.
• It was clarified that such relief is not automatic; the court must consider all usual factors such as dependency, income, conduct, and circumstances of the case.
• Denying maintenance merely because the marriage is void would, in many situations, lead to grave injustice and infringe the spouse’s right to live with dignity under Article 21.

Significance of the Decision

• Resolves earlier conflicting views among different High Courts regarding the availability of maintenance in void marriages under the HMA.
• Expands the protective umbrella of Sections 24 and 25 to include spouses in void marriages who may have lived together in a marital-like relationship and are economically dependent.
• Reinforces the trend towards a rights-based, dignity-oriented interpretation of matrimonial and maintenance law.
• Provides a strong basis for vulnerable spouses in void marriages (for example, second wives or those married within prohibited degrees) to seek financial protection through matrimonial courts.

Practical Implications for Litigants and Practitioners

• Spouses should be advised to file timely applications under Section 24 to avoid undue hardship during long-drawn matrimonial proceedings.
• Full and accurate disclosure of income, property and liabilities by both parties is essential for fair adjudication of maintenance claims.
• When seeking permanent alimony under Section 25, it is important to present a comprehensive picture of the marital history, standard of living, health, responsibilities and future needs.
• In cases of void or voidable marriages, the Sukhdev Singh ruling should be specifically cited to support claims for maintenance and alimony.
• Parties and counsel may explore settlement or mediation on the question of quantum and mode of payment (lump sum versus monthly), subject to court approval.
• After an order under Section 25, parties must monitor any material change in circumstances (remarriage, substantial change in income, serious illness, etc.), as such changes may justify an application for variation, enhancement, reduction or rescission.

Landmark Cases on Maintenance under Hindu Law

Indian courts have consistently interpreted maintenance provisions as instruments of social justice, rather than mere charity. Landmark decisions such as Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena, Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai, and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan affirm that the right to maintenance is rooted in dignity, equality and constitutional morality. Though these cases primarily arise under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, their principles strongly influence maintenance claims under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

Quick Overview of Key Principles

• Maintenance is a right, not charity – The wife’s claim is a legal entitlement, not an act of generosity.
• Dignity, not mere survival – Maintenance must secure a life of reasonable comfort, not bare subsistence.
• Realistic quantum – Courts must fix amounts that reflect actual living costs and the husband’s means.
• Timely relief – Delays and token amounts defeat the very purpose of maintenance law.
• Social justice orientation – These rulings are grounded in Articles 14, 15(3) and 39 of the Constitution.

Summary Table of Landmark Judgments

1. Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena & Ors. (2014) 6 SCC 353

Facts and Background

In this case, the wife filed an application under Section 125 CrPC for maintenance for herself and her minor son. The proceedings were subjected to prolonged delays, with repeated adjournments extending over several years. When maintenance was finally granted, a central controversy arose about whether the maintenance should run from the date of the application or from the date of the order, and more broadly, about the manner in which courts should approach maintenance claims.

Key Legal Issues

• The true nature and purpose of Section 125 CrPC.
• Whether maintenance should generally be awarded from the date of the application or from the date of the order.
• How courts should deal with undue delay in maintenance proceedings.

Key Holdings and Principles

1. Section 125 CrPC as a social-justice provision
   The Supreme Court emphasised that Section 125 CrPC is a measure of social justice, intended to prevent destitution and vagrancy of wives, children and parents. It is not a mere procedural remedy but a substantive relief, aligned with the Constitution’s commitment to social welfare, especially under Articles 15(3) and 39.
2. Maintenance is a right, not charity
   The Court clarified that the husband’s obligation to maintain his wife is legal and enforceable. Once the statutory conditions are satisfied – that the wife is unable to maintain herself and the husband has sufficient means – the wife’s claim is a right, not an act of benevolence.
3. Maintenance from the date of application
   Recognising the hardship caused by long pendency, the Court held that maintenance should ordinarily be granted from the date of the application, unless the court gives specific reasons to choose a later date. This principle is meant to neutralise the prejudice suffered by the claimant during the intervening years.
4. Condemnation of delay
   The Court strongly criticised inordinate delays in maintenance matters, observing that justice delayed is justice denied in such cases. It directed that maintenance proceedings must be dealt with expeditiously and with a sense of urgency.

Significance for Maintenance under Hindu Law

Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena is frequently relied upon in cases under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 to support:

• Grant of maintenance from the date of application.
• Recognition of maintenance as a legal right grounded in social justice.
• The need for speedy disposal of maintenance proceedings.

2. Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008) 2 SCC 316

Facts and Background

In Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai, the spouses had been married for many years and living separately for over two decades. The wife filed an application for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, asserting that she was unemployed and unable to maintain herself. The husband opposed the claim, arguing that she had some means and that she did not fall within the expression “unable to maintain herself”.

Key Legal Issues

• How should the phrase “unable to maintain herself” in Section 125 CrPC be interpreted?
• Does mere capability of earning, or minimal income, disqualify a wife from maintenance?
• What is the underlying object of maintenance proceedings?

Key Holdings and Principles

1. Object of maintenance – prevention of destitution
   The Court reiterated that the object of Section 125 is to prevent vagrancy and destitution by compelling those who can support others to do so. It is not to punish past neglect, but to ensure that those with a moral and legal claim to support are not left without means.
2. Meaning of “unable to maintain herself”
   The Supreme Court explained that a wife is “unable to maintain herself” not only when she is completely without income, but also when her existing income or resources are insufficient to sustain a dignified life. The standard is not mere survival, but maintenance at a level reasonably consistent with the status she enjoyed in the matrimonial home.
3. Sustenance is not mere survival
   The decision is widely cited for the principle that sustenance does not mean bare existence. Maintenance must ensure that the wife can live with dignity and not be driven to poverty or indignity.
4. Ability to earn is not a complete defence
   The Court held that the mere fact that a wife is educated, employable, or theoretically capable of earning does not by itself disentitle her to maintenance. The crucial test is whether her actual income (if any) is adequate to maintain herself with dignity, given the husband’s status and means.

Significance for Maintenance under Hindu Law

The reasoning in Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai is routinely applied in cases under Section 24 and Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act as well as Section 18 and Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. It strengthens arguments that:

• Maintenance should provide a dignified standard of living, not a token subsistence amount.
• The wife’s minimal or potential income does not automatically bar her from claiming maintenance.
• Courts must look at the real economic situation of the parties.

3. Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan (2015) 5 SCC 705

Facts and Background

Although involving Muslim parties, Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan is a crucial maintenance decision under Section 125 CrPC, which is a secular provision applicable irrespective of religion. The wife, Shamima, sought maintenance following divorce. The Family Court granted her maintenance at a certain rate for different periods, but the High Court reduced the amount, especially after the husband’s retirement, effectively making it a token sum. The wife challenged this reduction before the Supreme Court.

Key Legal Issues

• Whether the High Court was justified in substantially reducing the maintenance awarded by the Family Court.
• What parameters should govern the quantum of maintenance, particularly for a divorced wife.
• Whether a husband can rely on retirement or reduced income to justify only a nominal amount of maintenance.

Key Holdings and Principles

1. Maintenance must be realistic, not token
   The Supreme Court criticised the High Court for granting a meagre and unrealistic amount. It held that maintenance must be fixed at a level that is realistic and reasonable, taking into account the cost of living, inflation, the husband’s income and earning capacity, and the wife’s needs and status.
2. Dignity and status comparable to matrimonial life
   The Court emphasised that a woman compelled to leave her matrimonial home should not be reduced to begging or left in a state of humiliation. She is entitled to reside and live in a manner approximately similar to her life with her husband, subject to the limits of reasonableness. Maintenance is intended to protect her dignity and self-respect, not merely to keep her alive.
3. Able-bodied husband’s higher obligation
   The Court reiterated that an able-bodied husband has a heightened duty to support his wife. He cannot evade responsibility simply by asserting retirement or lower income if he remains capable of earning through legitimate means. The duty to maintain the wife and children stands on a higher pedestal than other financial commitments.
4. Secular character of Section 125 CrPC
   The decision reaffirms that Section 125 is a secular, social-welfare oriented provision, applicable to persons of all faiths, including Hindus, Muslims, Christians, etc. Its guiding objective is the amelioration of financial hardship and mental agony of women and dependants.

Significance for Maintenance under Hindu Law

Even though the parties in this case were Muslim, the interpretation of Section 125 CrPC in Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan is widely applied across maintenance jurisprudence, including:

• Hindu Marriage Act cases on interim and permanent alimony.
• Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act claims for wives, children and dependants.
• Domestic violence cases under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005.

The case is frequently cited to contest nominal or token maintenance orders and to argue for amounts that truly reflect the real needs of the wife and the earning capacity of the husband.

4. Combined Impact on Maintenance under Hindu Law

Collectively, these three landmark cases have significantly shaped the understanding of maintenance under Hindu law, even though they are framed in the context of Section 125 CrPC. Their principles are read into the interpretation of Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Sections 18, 19 and 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

Common Themes Established by These Judgments

• Maintenance as a right grounded in social justice
  Maintenance is not a matter of charity or benevolence. It is a legal right flowing from the statutory obligation of the husband (or other liable relatives) and is anchored in the Constitution’s commitment to equality and protection of vulnerable persons.
• Dignity and reasonable comfort, not subsistence
  From Chaturbhuj and Shamima Farooqui it is clear that maintenance must allow the wife to live with dignity, approximating the standard of living enjoyed during matrimony, rather than being confined to bare survival or symbolic amounts.
• Realistic and adequate quantum
  Courts are required to consider the actual cost of living, inflation, the husband’s earning capacity, and the lifestyle of the parties. Token or nominal maintenance is inconsistent with the spirit of these rulings.
• Timely and effective relief
  Bhuwan Mohan Singh especially highlights that delaying maintenance defeats its purpose. Hence, maintenance is often directed to be paid from the date of the application, and courts are reminded to dispose of such cases with priority.
• Able-bodied husband’s duty on a higher pedestal
  These judgments repeatedly underline that a husband who is physically able to work cannot avoid his duty by pleading unemployment, retirement, or marginal income. He is expected to make genuine efforts to earn and discharge his obligation to maintain his wife and dependants.

5. Conclusion

Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena, Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan collectively convert the concept of maintenance from a discretionary, charity-like relief into a rights-based, dignity-oriented remedy. For Hindu law, these decisions reinforce that maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act is firmly rooted in social justice, constitutional values and gender equality. The wife’s right to maintenance is thus recognised as an essential part of her right to live with dignity.

Maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA)

The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) is a codifying statute that consolidates and amends the law relating to adoptions and maintenance among Hindus. Chapter III of the Act (Sections 18–28) specifically deals with maintenance and creates statutory, enforceable obligations that arise out of status and family relationships rather than contract.

Scope of Maintenance under HAMA

HAMA recognizes maintenance rights in favour of the following categories of persons:

• Wife (Section 18)
• Widowed daughter-in-law (Section 19)
• Children and aged/infirm parents (Section 20)
• “Dependants” of a deceased Hindu (Sections 21–22)

“Maintenance” under HAMA is not confined to bare subsistence. It includes food, clothing, residence, education, and medical treatment, and in the case of an unmarried daughter, it also includes reasonable expenses of and incidental to her marriage.

Section 4 of HAMA gives the Act an overriding effect over any prior inconsistent text, rule, or usage under Hindu law. Any pre-existing customary or textual law inconsistent with the provisions of HAMA stands superseded.

HAMA co-exists with other statutory maintenance provisions, notably Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Sections 24–25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The remedies are supplementary and not mutually exclusive; however, courts ensure that there is no double recovery by adjusting amounts awarded under different statutes.

Section 18: Maintenance of Wife under HAMA

Section 18 recognizes a Hindu wife’s right to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime so long as she remains chaste and continues to be a Hindu. This right flows from the marital status and not from any contractual arrangement.

Right to Separate Residence and Maintenance

Under Section 18(2), a Hindu wife is entitled to live separately from her husband without forfeiting her claim to maintenance if he:

• Is guilty of desertion;
• Is guilty of cruelty or behaves in a manner that causes a reasonable apprehension that it is harmful or injurious to live with him;
• Suffers from a virulent form of leprosy (now read subject to modern health and anti-discrimination laws);
• Has another living wife;
• Keeps a concubine in the same house or habitually resides with her elsewhere;
• Has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion; or
• There is any other just cause which renders cohabitation unreasonable.

These grounds broadly overlap with grounds for matrimonial relief under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 but operate independently as grounds for claiming separate residence and maintenance under HAMA.

Loss of Right to Maintenance

Section 18(3) provides that a wife is not entitled to separate residence and maintenance if she is unchaste or ceases to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion. Courts interpret allegations of unchastity strictly; the burden of proof lies on the husband and mere suspicion is not sufficient to defeat the wife’s statutory right.

Relationship with Other Maintenance Laws

The right to maintenance under Section 18 is wider than the summary relief under Section 125 CrPC. While Section 125 aims to prevent destitution and vagrancy, Section 18 enforces a civil right arising from marriage and is intended to secure a reasonable standard of living for the wife consistent with her husband’s status. Courts often apply principles emerging from HAMA while fixing maintenance under other statutes so that the wife can live with dignity rather than mere survival.

Section 19: Maintenance of Widowed Daughter-in-Law

Section 19 provides for the maintenance of a widowed daughter-in-law by her father-in-law. The provision reflects the traditional expectation that a widow remains associated with her marital family, while adapting it to the modern principle that vulnerable widows should not be left destitute.

Conditions for Claiming Maintenance

A widowed daughter-in-law is entitled to maintenance from her father-in-law if:

• She is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or property; and
• She has no property of her husband, father, or mother, or such property is insufficient for her maintenance.

The father-in-law’s obligation is generally limited to the extent of the estate of the deceased son in his hands or the coparcenary property in which the son had an interest. This liability is also subject to the father-in-law’s own legitimate needs and the claims of other dependants.

Judicial Approach and Recent Developments

Recent High Court decisions have clarified that the widowed daughter-in-law’s right is a statutory right, to be considered even where she has limited means, so long as those means are insufficient to maintain a dignified standard of living. The courts have:

• Recognized that a widowed daughter-in-law and her minor children can claim maintenance from the father-in-law where he holds coparcenary or ancestral property and they are unable to maintain themselves.
• Emphasized that although the father-in-law’s liability is linked to the estate or property of the deceased son, it cannot be denied on technical grounds where he clearly has sufficient resources.

Section 19 thus functions as an important social welfare safeguard for widows within the Hindu joint family framework.

Section 20: Maintenance of Children and Aged Parents

Section 20 casts a statutory obligation on a Hindu to maintain:

• Legitimate or illegitimate minor sons;
• Legitimate or illegitimate unmarried daughters; and
• Aged or infirm parents who are unable to maintain themselves.

Maintenance of Children

The right of a minor child to maintenance is absolute and does not depend on the child’s conduct. Courts have consistently held that:

• The obligation to maintain an unmarried daughter may extend beyond the age of majority if she is unable to maintain herself.
• The obligation includes reasonable expenses for the daughter’s marriage, in addition to her day-to-day needs.
• Fathers cannot evade responsibility by remaining intentionally under-employed or by diverting income and assets.

Courts also draw upon Section 20 principles when interpreting allied provisions, such as Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, to ensure that the child’s welfare and right to maintenance is the central consideration.

Maintenance of Aged or Infirm Parents

Section 20 expressly recognizes the right of aged or infirm parents to be maintained by their sons and daughters if they are unable to maintain themselves. This provision complements, and is broader in some respects than, the summary remedy under Section 125 CrPC.

Recent judicial trends emphasize:

• The duty to maintain parents is independent and personal; it cannot be avoided by pointing to other children or relatives.
• Maintenance orders must be realistic, keeping in view rising costs of living and medical expenses, and must ensure dignity in old age.

While many of these observations arise in criminal-law maintenance proceedings, courts carry the same moral and legal approach into cases under HAMA, reiterating that maintenance is a legal obligation and not an act of charity.

Sections 21–22: Dependants and Their Rights

Section 21: Definition of “Dependants”

Section 21 defines “dependants” of a deceased Hindu. The list is exhaustive and includes, among others:

• His or her widow or widower;
• Minor sons and unmarried daughters;
• Widowed daughters;
• Aged or infirm parents;
• Widowed daughter-in-law;
• Minor illegitimate sons and unmarried illegitimate daughters; and
• Certain other relatives mentioned in the section who were wholly or partly dependent on the deceased at the time of death.

Section 22: Obligation of Heirs to Maintain Dependants

Section 22 imposes an obligation on the heirs of a deceased Hindu who inherit his or her estate to maintain the dependants defined in Section 21. Key features include:

• Each heir is liable in proportion to the value of the estate that he or she has inherited.
• The liability is limited to the estate inherited from the deceased and does not normally extend to the heir’s separate or self-acquired property.
• The right to maintenance of dependants is subordinate to the payment of the deceased’s debts, but has priority over the heirs’ unfettered use of the inherited property.

Courts have clarified the contours of these rights:

• A person who is a Class I heir inheriting substantial property is generally not treated as a dependant for additional maintenance under Section 22.
• The statutory list of dependants is closed; for example, a divorced daughter is not treated as a “dependant” under Section 21 and cannot claim maintenance under Sections 21–22.
• A widowed daughter-in-law can be treated as a dependant and may claim maintenance from the estate or coparcenary property of her deceased father-in-law in appropriate cases.

Overall, Sections 21–22 are designed to ensure that vulnerable family members of a deceased Hindu are not left destitute when the estate passes into the hands of heirs.

Maintenance of Wife under HAMA: Nature and Standard

The husband’s duty to maintain his wife under HAMA arises from the marital relationship itself. Once a valid Hindu marriage is established, the obligation to maintain the wife exists independently of any contract, subject only to statutory limitations such as unchastity or conversion.

Purpose and Standard of Maintenance

Courts consistently hold that maintenance under Section 18 must:

• Enable the wife to live with dignity;
• Approximate, as far as reasonably possible, the standard of living she enjoyed in the matrimonial home; and
• Provide for reasonable comfort, having regard to the husband’s income, status, and lifestyle.

Maintenance is not intended to give the wife a mere “animal existence”; it must be sufficient to secure a decent and dignified life in light of the realities of inflation and the cost of living.

Factors Considered in Fixing Quantum

While determining the quantum of maintenance, courts usually consider:

• The earning capacity and actual income of the husband, including his potential income where he is deliberately under-employed;
• The reasonable needs of the wife, including housing, food, clothing, healthcare, transportation, and, in appropriate cases, litigation expenses;
• The standard of living enjoyed during the subsistence of the marriage;
• The presence of children or other dependants and the husband’s other legal obligations; and
• The conduct of the parties, without treating minor disagreements as grounds to refuse maintenance.

Recent judicial trends stress the social purpose of maintenance provisions: to prevent economic abuse, neglect, and destitution of women in a patriarchal setting. Courts are increasingly vigilant against attempts by husbands to evade their responsibilities by concealing income, transferring assets, or prolonging litigation. The overall approach is to interpret maintenance provisions liberally in favour of securing social justice and protecting vulnerable family members.

Types of Maintenance in Hindu Law

Under Hindu law and general Indian family law, “maintenance” is a multi-layered concept. Different statutes and mechanisms operate together to prevent destitution and ensure a basic standard of living for spouses, children, parents and other dependents. The main categories are:

• Interim Maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA)
• Permanent Maintenance under Section 25 HMA
• Statutory Maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA)
• Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS (secular, quasi-criminal remedy)
• Contractual and Customary Maintenance

1. Interim Maintenance — Section 24 HMA

Purpose and Nature

Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides maintenance pendente lite (maintenance during the pendency of proceedings) and litigation expenses to a spouse who has no independent income sufficient for their support and for the costs of the proceedings.

• Temporary in nature: It operates only while the HMA case is pending.
• Need-based: It focuses on immediate survival and the ability to contest the case effectively.
• Gender-neutral: Either spouse (husband or wife) can apply if financially weaker.

When Can It Be Claimed?

Interim maintenance can be claimed in any proceeding under the HMA, such as:

• Petitions for divorce
• Judicial separation
• Restitution of conjugal rights
• Nullity of marriage (void or voidable)

The financially weaker spouse can apply for:

• Monthly maintenance during the pendency of the case; and
• A one-time amount towards expenses of the proceedings (court fees, travel, lawyer’s fees, etc.).

Key Factors Considered by Courts

While fixing interim maintenance, courts typically consider:

• Actual and potential income of both spouses (salary, business, rent, investments, etc.).
• The standard of living enjoyed during the marriage.
• Existing financial liabilities (loans, dependent family members, health needs).
• Any concealment or misrepresentation of income by either side.
• Reasonable needs of the applicant (housing, food, education of children in their custody, medical expenses).

Supreme Court Guidelines in Rajnesh v. Neha (2020)

In Rajnesh v. Neha, the Supreme Court framed uniform guidelines on maintenance, applicable across different statutes (HMA, HAMA, CrPC/BNSS, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, etc.). Some key aspects include:

• Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities: Both parties must file detailed affidavits disclosing income, assets and expenditure, to minimise concealment and guesswork.
• Commencement date of maintenance: Maintenance should ordinarily be awarded from the date of the application, not merely from the date of the final order.
• Avoiding overlapping maintenance: If maintenance is awarded under multiple statutes (e.g., HMA and CrPC/BNSS), courts must adjust the amounts so that the claimant does not receive double benefits.

Void or Voidable Marriages

The Supreme Court has clarified that even where a marriage is declared void under Section 11 HMA, the economically weaker spouse may still claim interim (and later permanent) maintenance under Sections 24 and 25 to prevent destitution. The focus is on social justice rather than the technical status of the marriage.

2. Permanent Maintenance — Section 25 HMA

Concept and Scope

Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 deals with permanent alimony and maintenance. Once a court passes any decree under HMA (divorce, judicial separation, annulment, or restitution of conjugal rights), it may order payment of permanent maintenance:

• As a lump-sum amount, or
• As periodic payments (e.g., monthly or annual maintenance).

Who Can Claim and When?

• Either spouse (husband or wife) can seek permanent maintenance under Section 25.
• The court may grant it:
  • At the time of passing the decree; or
  • At any time thereafter on a separate application.

Forms of Relief

Courts may order:

• Periodic payments: Monthly or annual payments for life or for a specified duration, depending on the circumstances.
• Lump-sum payments: A one-time settlement, often accompanied by transfer of movable or immovable property.
• Charge on property: The court can direct that the maintenance amount be charged on the immovable property of the paying spouse.

Factors Considered by Courts

While determining permanent alimony, Section 25 requires the court to consider a range of factors, including:

• Income and property of both spouses.
• Age, health, qualifications and employability of the claimant.
• Conduct of the parties (e.g., cruelty, desertion, abandonment).
• The lifestyle enjoyed during the subsistence of marriage.
• Financial obligations of the paying spouse towards children, aged parents and others.
• Any other relevant circumstances affecting hardship or capacity to pay.

Variation and Cancellation

Orders under Section 25 are not frozen permanently. They can be:

• Varied or modified in the event of a material change in circumstances (e.g., loss of job, financial windfall, serious illness, disability, or change in dependency).
• Cancelled or reduced if:
  • The wife receiving maintenance remarries or is proved to be living in adultery; or
  • The husband’s circumstances or conduct change in a manner affecting the justice of the order.

Recent Judicial Trends

Recent Supreme Court decisions have emphasised that maintenance must be realistic and sufficient to allow the dependent spouse to live with dignity. Courts have:

• Substantially enhanced monthly maintenance where the paying spouse has high income.
• Directed transfer of residential property (e.g., flats, houses) to the wife as part of permanent alimony and full and final settlements.
• Rejected exaggerated claims (e.g., luxury vehicles, disproportionate cash amounts) where found excessive and unsupported by the overall circumstances.

3. Statutory Maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA)

Overview of HAMA

The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) codifies certain aspects of Hindu personal law. Chapter III (Sections 18–22) relates specifically to maintenance. It governs obligations of a Hindu towards:

• Wife
• Children (legitimate and illegitimate, in defined circumstances)
• Aged or infirm parents
• Certain dependents of a deceased Hindu

Maintenance of Wife — Section 18

Section 18 HAMA recognises that a Hindu wife is entitled to be maintained by her husband during her lifetime. She may also live separately and still claim maintenance if the husband:

• Is guilty of cruelty.
• Deserts or willfully neglects her.
• Has another wife living.
• Keeps a concubine.
• Converts to another religion.
• Is guilty of any other justifiable misconduct making it unsafe or unreasonable to live with him.

The wife may lose her right to maintenance if she is unchaste or ceases to be a Hindu.

Maintenance of Widowed Daughter-in-law — Section 19

Under Section 19, a widowed Hindu daughter-in-law can claim maintenance from her father-in-law if:

• She is unable to maintain herself from her own earnings or property.
• She has not obtained maintenance from the estate of her husband or her own parents.
• The father-in-law has sufficient means.

Maintenance of Children and Aged Parents — Section 20

Section 20 imposes a duty on a Hindu to maintain:

• Legitimate and illegitimate minor children.
• Adult children who are unable to maintain themselves due to physical or mental abnormality or injury.
• Aged or infirm parents who are unable to maintain themselves.

This obligation is a civil personal-law duty, distinct from but parallel to the secular remedy under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS.

Maintenance of Dependents of a Deceased Hindu — Sections 21–22

Sections 21 and 22 define “dependents” and provide for their maintenance from the estate of a deceased Hindu. Dependents can include:

• Minor sons and daughters.
• Unmarried daughters.
• Widowed daughter-in-law.
• Aged parents and other relatives in specified circumstances.

The liability is essentially on the estate of the deceased in the hands of the heirs, and generally cannot exceed the value of the property inherited by them.

Nature and Forum

• Claims under HAMA are usually filed in civil courts (as suits or petitions).
• Orders under HAMA can co-exist with orders under HMA and CrPC/BNSS.
• Courts try to harmonise and adjust awards so that the claimant does not receive overlapping and disproportionate amounts from multiple proceedings.

4. Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS

From CrPC to BNSS

Historically, Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) provided a summary remedy for maintenance of wives, children and parents. With the enactment of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), which has come into force, this scheme is substantially preserved and re-numbered (broadly) as Section 144.

In practice, courts and practitioners often still refer to “Section 125 cases”, although new proceedings will be governed by the BNSS provisions in force.

Beneficiaries

Under the CrPC and BNSS framework, the following persons can claim maintenance:

• Wife: Includes a legally wedded wife and a divorced wife who has not remarried and is unable to maintain herself.
• Children: Legitimate or illegitimate children who are unable to maintain themselves. (Judicial interpretations and the change in BNSS wording may broaden claims in certain cases.)
• Parents: Father or mother who are unable to maintain themselves.

Conditions for Granting Maintenance

The key conditions for awarding maintenance under this provision are:

• The person from whom maintenance is sought has sufficient means.
• There is neglect or refusal to maintain the claimant.
• The claimant is unable to maintain herself/himself.

Disqualifications for the Wife

A wife is not entitled to maintenance if she:

• Is living in adultery; or
• Without sufficient reason, refuses to live with her husband; or
• Is living separately by mutual consent.

Courts insist that these disqualifications must be clearly proved and are not to be lightly inferred.

Nature of the Remedy

Maintenance under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS is:

• Secular: It applies irrespective of religion or personal law.
• Summary and quick: Designed as a speedy, quasi-criminal remedy to prevent destitution and vagrancy.
• Subsistence-oriented: Quantum is meant to secure basic living with dignity, not necessarily full lifestyle parity.

Interim Maintenance and Expenses

Amendments have clarified that courts can grant interim maintenance and litigation expenses during the pendency of proceedings so that the claimant is not left without support while the case continues.

Enforcement

To enforce maintenance orders, courts can:

• Issue a warrant for recovery of the amount in arrears.
• In case of wilful and continued default, order simple imprisonment for a limited period for each month of default.

Co-existence with HMA and HAMA

A spouse or child may have:

• An interim or permanent maintenance order under the HMA;
• A civil maintenance order under HAMA; and
• A summary maintenance order under Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS.

Courts are expected to harmonise these orders, set-off overlapping amounts, and ensure that the overall maintenance is just but not duplicative.

5. Contractual and Customary Maintenance

Overview

In addition to statutory rights, maintenance may also arise from contracts, settlements and customs. Although not based on a single statute, these play a major role in practical family law and dispute resolution.

(a) Contractual Maintenance

Common contractual sources of maintenance obligations include:

• Family settlements and separation agreements: Parties may agree on monthly maintenance or lump-sum settlements as part of resolving marital disputes.
• Mediation and conciliation settlements: Terms recorded before mediators and then made the basis of court orders in HMA, DV, or Section 125/BNSS proceedings.
• Consent terms in divorce petitions: For example, a mutual consent divorce under HMA with agreed lump-sum alimony in full and final settlement of all claims.
• Registered maintenance deeds: Formal instruments within families providing for periodic payments or transfer of property as financial security.

Indian courts generally enforce compromise decrees, consent orders and settlements, subject to public policy. Agreements that wholly exclude a wife’s right to maintenance in a manner contrary to statute or public policy may be declared void to that extent.

(b) Customary Maintenance

Certain Hindu communities follow customary practices concerning maintenance, such as:

• Maintenance to widows or deserted women by the joint family or community.
• Customary property arrangements (similar to streedhan) that function as long-term financial security.
• Region-specific customs involving gifts, allowances or payments linked with marriage or widowhood.

For a custom to be legally valid, it must generally be:

• Ancient (of long duration),
• Certain and consistently followed, and
• Reasonable and not opposed to public policy.

Importantly, Section 4 of both the Hindu Marriage Act and the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act gives these Acts overriding effect over prior customs or usages that are inconsistent with their provisions. Thus, in any conflict between statute and custom, the statutory provisions prevail.

6. Integrated View of Maintenance for Hindus

For Hindus in India today, the law of maintenance is best understood as an integrated framework:

• HMA (Sections 24 & 25): Provides interim and permanent maintenance in connection with matrimonial causes in family courts.
• HAMA (Sections 18–22): Imposes civil personal-law obligations to maintain the wife, children, parents and certain dependents.
• CrPC Section 125 / BNSS Section 144: Offers a secular, speedy, quasi-criminal safety net against destitution for wives, children and parents.
• Contractual and customary mechanisms: Operate through settlements, consent decrees, property transfers and community practices, subject to statutory override.

When multiple proceedings under different laws are simultaneously invoked, courts strive to avoid conflicting or overlapping orders and aim to secure a balanced, dignified standard of living for the dependent party without creating unjust enrichment.