The Uttarakhand High Court modified a Family Court order under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, enhancing maintenance for a wife and minor daughter and, for the first time, granting maintenance to a step-son despite the absence of a biological relationship, thereby clarifying the scope of a husband’s duty.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
- The revisionists (wife, minor daughter, and son) filed an application under Section 125 CrPC seeking maintenance from respondent no.2 (the husband).
- The Family Court, in its order dated 24 January 2022, partially allowed the application: maintenance of ₹8,000 per month to the wife (revisionist no.1) and ₹6,000 per month to the minor daughter (revisionist no.3). The claim of the son (revisionist no.2) was rejected on the ground that respondent no.2 was not his biological father.
Key Facts
- The marriage between revisionist no.1 and respondent no.2 was solemnised in 2013; respondent no.2 was fully aware that revisionist no.1 had a son (revisionist no.2) from a previous marriage.
- Respondent no.2’s salary slip for November 2025 shows a gross salary of ₹2,01,843 and a net salary of ₹1,06,654; after excluding non-permissible deductions, his effective monthly income exceeds ₹1,50,000.
- Revisionist no.1 is employed, earning approximately ₹55,000-₹58,000 per month and resides in a flat owned by respondent no.2.
- In a prior divorce, revisionist no.1 received ₹5,00,000 as settlement for her stridhan and the maintenance of revisionist no.2.
- The son’s date of birth is 23 November 2007.
Procedural History
- 24 January 2022: Family Court order granting maintenance to wife and daughter, rejecting son’s claim.
- [Date of filing of revision application]: Revisionists filed a criminal revision under Section 125 CrPC assailing the Family Court order.
- 20 August 2026: Uttarakhand High Court delivered the judgment, modifying the maintenance amounts and granting maintenance to the son.
Parties' Positions
- Revisionists argued that respondent no.2 voluntarily assumed responsibility for the son by marrying the mother with full knowledge of the child’s existence; they also contended that the Family Court failed to consider respondent’s actual income.
- Respondent no.2 contended that the wife’s independent earnings and the settlement from her previous marriage should preclude any further maintenance, especially for the son who is not biologically his.
Relief Sought
- Enhancement of maintenance for the wife and minor daughter.
- Grant of maintenance to the son despite the lack of a biological link.
- Consideration of respondent’s actual income for appropriate quantum of maintenance.
Case Details
Revisionist vs State Of Uttarakhand
2026:UHC:7531
Court
Uttarakhand High Court
Date
2026-08-20
Case Number
CRLR/100/2022
Bench
Alok Mahra
Counsel
Pet: Akshay Pradhan
Res: J.P. Kandpal, Prabha Naithani
Frequently Asked Questions
Yes. The Court held that once a husband voluntarily assumes responsibility for a child by marrying the mother with full knowledge of the child’s existence, he cannot later deny maintenance on the ground of non-biological relationship.
Only legitimate and permissible deductions may be considered. Deductions that create or enhance assets cannot be used to substantially reduce assessable income, as per the Supreme Court precedent cited.
The Court observed that a settlement received by the wife for her stridhan and prior maintenance does not extinguish the husband’s independent obligation to maintain the step-child.
