The Allahabad High Court recently directed that enhanced maintenance be paid to a woman from her husband's salary, while referring to a Supreme Court ruling and a verse from the Manusmriti [Pinki Verma And Another v State of UP and Another]
Justice Praveen Kumar Giri observed that both the top court and Manusmriti have held maintenance of wife to be a husband's pious obligation.
"This Court observes that not only legal but a pious obligation is upon the husband to maintain his chaste wife, minor children and parents, if they are financially unable to maintain themselves. The same has also been observed in paragraph 10 of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Anju Garg and another vs. Deepak Kumar Garg, 2022 INSC 1033 : 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1314, Section 125 Cr.P.C./144 BNSS as well as in Chapter XI Verse 10 (Ekadasha Adhyaya Shlok 10) of the Manusmriti," the Court said.
The Court reproduced the Supreme Court findings, the legal provisions and the verse of Manusmriti in its order.
The Court was dealing with a woman's petition seeking directions for payment of ₹40,000 per month from her husband. A family court earlier directed payment of maintenance of ₹19,000 to her.
It was argued that the payment of maintenance to her was not in accordance with the Supreme Court's ruling that 25 percent of the husband's salary would be just and proper towards maintenance.
Her husband, who is working as a window operator in Indian Bank, agreed to the deduction.
Accordingly, the Court directed deduction of 25 percent of his gross salary, after excluding the amount deducted towards income tax, as maintenance amount from his salary account and for crediting the same to the verified bank account of wife.
"The concerned trial court i.e. Principal Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar is also directed to pass an order directing the concerned higher authority of the Indian Bank, District Unnao to deduct 25% of his gross salary, after excluding the amount deducted towards income tax, as maintenance amount from his salary account and for crediting the same to the verified bank account of revisionist no.1/wife," the Court ordered.
Advocate Diwas Verma represented the petitioner.
Advocate Bhole Ram represented the husband.
[Read Order]