MEANING, DEFINITION & EXPLANATION

Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, addresses the maintenance obligations towards wives, children, and parents. This provision ensures that individuals with sufficient means do not neglect their dependents who cannot support themselves. The section mandates that a person must provide a monthly allowance for the maintenance of:

• His wife, if she is unable to maintain herself.
• His legitimate or illegitimate child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself.
• His legitimate or illegitimate child (excluding a married daughter) who has attained majority but is unable to maintain itself due to physical or mental abnormalities or injuries.
• His father or mother, if they are unable to maintain themselves.

This provision aims to prevent destitution and ensure financial support for dependents. It reflects the state’s commitment to uphold social justice by legally enforcing familial responsibilities.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND / EVOLUTION

The concept of maintenance in Indian law has evolved to protect dependents from destitution. Initially, Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, provided a legal remedy for dependents neglected by those with sufficient means. This secular provision applied uniformly across all religions, ensuring that no individual was left without support due to personal laws. The landmark case of Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) highlighted the applicability of Section 125 CrPC to Muslim women, emphasizing that a divorced Muslim woman could claim maintenance beyond the iddat period if she was unable to maintain herself. This judgment reinforced the principle that the right to maintenance is a facet of social justice, transcending personal laws.

With the enactment of the BNSS in 2023, Section 144 replaced Section 125 CrPC, continuing the commitment to provide maintenance to dependents. The new provision retains the essence of its predecessor while incorporating necessary updates to address contemporary societal needs. This evolution signifies the legal system’s responsiveness to changing social dynamics and its dedication to protecting vulnerable sections of society.

LEGAL PROVISIONS / PROCEDURE / SPECIFICATIONS / CRITERIA

Section 144 of the BNSS outlines the procedure for claiming maintenance:

1. Application:
   A dependent (wife, child, or parent) who is unable to maintain themselves can file an application before a Magistrate of the first class, alleging neglect or refusal by the person responsible for their maintenance.

2. Interim Maintenance:
   During the pendency of the proceedings, the Magistrate may order the respondent to pay interim maintenance and reasonable expenses of the proceeding. Such applications should be disposed of within 60 days from the date of service of notice to the respondent.

3. Evidence and Proof:
   The applicant must provide evidence of the respondent’s neglect or refusal to maintain and their own inability to maintain themselves. The respondent’s financial capacity is also assessed.

4. Order:
   Upon satisfaction, the Magistrate can order a monthly allowance at a rate deemed fit, considering the needs of the applicant and the means of the respondent.

5. Enforcement:
   If the respondent fails to comply with the maintenance order, the amount can be recovered as a fine, and the Magistrate may issue a warrant for levying the amount. Non-compliance can lead to imprisonment for a term up to one month for each month’s default.

6. Alteration of Allowance:
   On proof of a change in circumstances, the Magistrate may alter the maintenance allowance as deemed appropriate.

These provisions ensure a structured and time-bound process for securing maintenance, emphasizing the legal obligation to support dependents.

CASE LAWS / PRECEDENTS / OVERRULING JUDGMENTS

1. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985):
   In this landmark case, the Supreme Court held that Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS) applies to all citizens, irrespective of religion, and that a divorced Muslim woman is entitled to maintenance if she cannot maintain herself. The Court emphasized that the provision is a measure of social justice intended to protect dependents from destitution.

2. Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008):
   The Supreme Court clarified that the term “unable to maintain herself” does not mean that the wife must be absolutely destitute before she can apply for maintenance. It is sufficient if she does not have an independent income sufficient for her livelihood. The Court held that even if the wife earns some income, she can still claim maintenance if it is not enough for her sustenance.

3. Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena (2014):
   The Supreme Court reiterated that Section 125 CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS) is a measure of social justice and is specially enacted to protect women and children. The Court emphasized that the object of the provision is to prevent vagrancy and destitution, and the wife is entitled to live with dignity, similar to her husband’s standard of living.

4. Rajnesh v. Neha (2020):
   The Supreme Court laid down comprehensive guidelines regarding the payment of maintenance in matrimonial matters. The Court directed that affidavits of disclosure of assets and liabilities should be filed by both parties in maintenance proceedings to enable the courts to determine the quantum of maintenance. The Court also emphasized that maintenance should be granted from the date of application to avoid undue hardship to the applicant.

These judgments have played a pivotal role in interpreting maintenance laws, ensuring that the provisions serve their intended purpose of providing financial support to dependents and preventing destitution.