#Child Support

The Kerala High Court ruled that past maintenance under Section 125 CrPC cannot be arbitrarily capped when the husband earns abroad and the child incurs substantial educational expenses. The judgment establishes that courts must account for actual foreign earnings and child-specific costs, not just local norms, setting a new benchmark for maintenance calculations in transnational family disputes.

The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that a wife’s separation from her husband, even if unilaterally initiated and without proven cruelty or misconduct, does not extinguish her statutory right to interim maintenance under BNSS Section 144. This reinforces that economic vulnerability and lack of independent income, not marital fault, are the decisive factors in granting maintenance - a critical safeguard for financially dependent spouses in pending proceedings.

Madhya Pradesh High Court rules that maintenance calculations under Section 12 of the Family Courts Act must include all income sources-including auto dealership profits and driving earnings-rejecting partial assessments. The judgment enhances maintenance to ₹7,500/month for wife and child, setting a precedent for comprehensive financial disclosure in matrimonial disputes.

Tripura High Court reduces interim maintenance from ₹8,000 to ₹4,000, ruling that child support must reflect the financial capacity of both parents-not just the father’s earnings. The court emphasized proportional contribution based on income, setting a precedent for equitable burden-sharing in maintenance cases.

Bombay High Court holds that DNA evidence conclusively establishes paternity under Section 125 CrPC, entitling a minor child to maintenance regardless of marital disputes.

Bombay High Court holds that rising cost of living and increased income justify maintenance enhancement under Section 127 Cr.P.C., even if the child is now an adult and living separately.