#maintenance under CrPC

Allahabad High Court rules that maintenance under Section 125 CrPC cannot be denied solely due to lack of strict marriage proof if cohabitation, childbirth, and attempted marriage are admitted. The Court emphasizes a purposive interpretation of maintenance laws, remanding the case for fresh adjudication while mandating compliance with Rajnesh v. Neha affidavit guidelines.

Allahabad High Court rules that imposing 50% of maintenance arrears as a precondition for restoration applications under Section 126 CrPC is arbitrary and illegal. The Court reduced the cost to Rs. 1,00,000, reinforcing that procedural requirements must align with principles of natural justice and cannot impose undue financial burdens on litigants.

J&K High Court rules that a wife living separately by mutual consent, even without a legal divorce, cannot claim maintenance under Section 488 CrPC. The court emphasized judicial admissions and conduct over technical marital status, while ordering a ₹2.5 lakh one-time settlement to prevent destitution, highlighting the balance between legal technicalities and equitable relief.