Who is More Entitled to Maintenance in India — Wife, Children or Parents? Supreme Court Clarifies

Introduction:

Maintenance is a crucial aspect of family law in India, designed to ensure that dependents are not left destitute. The question often arises: who is more entitled to receive maintenance — wife, children, or parents? With increasing family disputes and litigation, understanding the legal priority and eligibility under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) becomes essential.

This article explores the law, Supreme Court rulings, and case analyses to explain the legal framework and entitlement hierarchy.

Legal Framework: Section 125 of CrPC

Section 125 CrPC provides that a person having sufficient means is liable to maintain:

• His wife (who is unable to maintain herself)

• His legitimate or illegitimate minor child

• His legitimate or illegitimate child (adult) if they are unable to maintain due to physical/mental infirmity

• His father or mother if they are unable to maintain themselves

This provision is gender-neutral regarding children and parents but specifies “wife,” making the husband liable.

Hierarchy of Maintenance Claims: Who Comes First?

The CrPC does not explicitly lay down a hierarchy in terms of entitlement. However, judicial interpretations and principles of “urgency of need” and dependency are used to determine priorities.

Let us now examine how courts have addressed this question.

1. Wife’s Right to Maintenance:

Legal Basis:

Section 125 CrPC + Personal laws (Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 24 and 25)

Supreme Court View:

In Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008) 2 SCC 316, the Court held that even if the wife is capable of earning but does not actually earn, she is entitled to maintenance if she cannot sustain herself.

In Rajnesh v. Neha (2020) 12 SCC 285, the Supreme Court emphasized:

“Maintenance is not charity. A wife is entitled to live in a similar standard as her husband.”

The Court also directed uniform maintenance guidelines to avoid multiplicity of litigation.

Key Point:

Wife’s right is prioritized based on dependency and subsistence, especially if minor children are also with her.

2. Children’s Right to Maintenance:

Legal Basis:

Section 125 CrPC (minor or disabled child — regardless of gender)

Supreme Court View:

In Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena & Ors (2015) 6 SCC 353, the Court strongly upheld the child’s right to maintenance, stating:



“No father can abdicate responsibility of providing maintenance to his child under the garb of poverty.”

In case of custody with the mother, courts award interim maintenance to both mother and child jointly.

Key Point:

Minor children’s needs take moral and legal priority, especially for education and health expenses.

3. Parents’ Right to Maintenance:

Legal Basis:

Section 125 CrPC + Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007

Supreme Court View:

In Kirtikumar Maheshankar Joshi v. Pradipkumar Karunashankar Joshi (1992) 1 SCC 179, the Supreme Court observed:

“A son cannot escape liability to maintain aged parents merely because he is married or has a family.”

Also, in Manju Tiwari v. Rajendra Tiwari, the Court held:

“Children have an obligation to maintain aged parents and failing that, courts can enforce the obligation.”

Key Point:

Parents must show inability to maintain themselves and that the child has sufficient means.

Judicial Interpretation on Priority:

Although no statutory ranking exists, courts often evaluate:

• Urgency of need (e.g., minor child’s education, medical needs)

• Total dependency

• Lack of alternate support

Illustrative Case:

In Shailja & Anr v. Khobbanna (2017) 9 SCC 62, the Court noted:

“The primary objective of Section 125 CrPC is to prevent vagrancy and destitution, and hence maintenance must be awarded with humanitarian consideration.”

What If a Nominee or Spouse Deprives Legal Maintenance Beneficiary?

Remedy in Law:

If a husband hides income or denies maintenance:

• File an application under Section 125 CrPC

• Seek interim relief

• File for execution of maintenance order

If parents or children are neglected, they may approach the Maintenance Tribunal under MWPSC Act, 2007.

If a wife is harassed, she may also claim residence and protection under DV Act, 2005.

Examples:

✅ A divorced wife without remarriage is entitled to maintenance under CrPC, even if maintenance was rejected under personal law – Rohtash Singh v. Ramendri (2000) 3 SCC 180.

✅ An unemployed adult daughter with disability can claim maintenance – Rambhau v. Rekha AIR 2016 Bom 200.

✅ Father neglected by his son, a government employee, got maintenance enforced via garnishee orders.

Conclusion:

The right to maintenance is not a privilege — it’s a legal obligation. The courts prioritize necessity, dependency, and fairness over status. While minor children often receive top consideration, wives and dependent parents also enjoy strong legal protection.

How KHA Advocates Can Help

At KHA Advocates, we specialize in family law litigation including:

• Filing and defending maintenance claims

• Representing wives, parents, and children under CrPC and personal laws

• Enforcement of maintenance orders

• Expert counsel in cross-jurisdictional NRI maintenance cases

Need expert legal help to claim or defend maintenance?

📞 Contact KHA Advocates today to schedule a consultation.