Husband liable to maintain child even when wife is earning sufficiently: Punjab and Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently observed that a man does not automatically get absolved of his responsibility to maintain children even if his wife is earning sufficiently..Justice Sumeet Goel made the observation while rejecting a husband’s contention that he was not liable to maintain his daughter since she was in custody of her mother who had sufficient means to maintain and look after her.Even when the mother is working, it does not mean the father will be absolved from taking responsibility for the child, the Court said.“Section 125 Cr. P.C. is a tool for social justice enacted to ensure that women and children are protected from a life of potential vagrancy and destitution. If the husband/father has sufficient means, he is obligated to maintain his wife and children, and cannot shirk away from moral and familial responsibilities,” the single-judge said..The Court was hearing a revision petition moved by a man against a family court’s order directing him to pay an interim maintenance of ₹7,000 to his minor daughter.It was argued that he has an income of only ₹22,000 and six family members are dependent on him. Further, the Court was told the child’s mother had sufficient means to maintain her..However, the Court observed that the order granting interim maintenance is subject to final adjudication and is only a provisional step before conclusion of proceedings.“The family court observed that since the respondent (herein) is the minor daughter of the petitioner (herein) and has no independent source of income to support herself, it is the moral and legal duty of the respondent to support her. Being the father, the petitioner (herein) is obligated to maintain her to ensure a decent standard of living,” it added. .The family court had considered not only the man’s financial capability but also the comprehensive efforts required to raise a child, which should be fairly shared between both the parents, the Court further said.Thus, the Court held that the interim maintenance granted by the family court does not call for any interference.“Accordingly, the instant petition is hereby dismissed,” it ordered..Advocate Rahul Garg represented the petitioner.