Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court has upheld a Family Court order directing Kanpur resident Gaurav Gupta to pay Rs 40,000 per month as maintenance to his ex-wife Ritika and their daughter. The husband had challenged the order, arguing that his wife is educated and capable of earning. The court, however, rejected this claim, citing Supreme Court precedents that an educated spouse’s potential to earn cannot be a ground to deny maintenance.
Wife’s Childcare Role Recognised As Valid Reason For Support
Justice Madanpal Singh, hearing the single-judge bench, observed that even if the wife is qualified, she is currently unable to work due to childcare responsibilities. The Family Court had initially granted Rs 20,000 per month to Ritika and Rs 20,000 to their daughter.
Gaurav’s petition questioned the amount, stating his own monthly income is only Rs 20,000 and pointing out that Ritika has an interior design degree and had earned independently prior to marriage and childbirth.
Court Notes Concealment Of Income
The High Court noted that the husband has concealed part of his income and possesses sufficient means to meet the maintenance obligations. The judgment emphasized that a capable and healthy adult is legally expected to provide adequately for their spouse and children. It referenced a Delhi High Court ruling supporting this principle.
Case Background And Legal Context
The marriage between Gaurav and Ritika took place on October 10, 2018, and the couple had one daughter. Following disagreements, Gaurav filed for divorce, and Ritika, on February 14, 2022, sought maintenance from the Family Court. The court, after assessing financial capabilities and responsibilities, issued its order on October 8, 2024.
Judgment Reinforces Legal Protections For Dependents
The Allahabad High Court’s decision reinforces legal protections for dependent spouses and children, highlighting that potential earning capacity alone does not negate the right to financial support. The ruling ensures that children’s needs and the non-working spouse’s legitimate expectations are adequately met.
This verdict also underscores judicial scrutiny over transparency in declaring income and financial capacity by the paying party. By dismissing Gaurav Gupta’s challenge, the court has affirmed the Family Court’s authority in balancing parental responsibilities and the welfare of the child.
Stay on arrest of GST AC
The Allahabad High Court has granted relief to Assistant Commissioner GST, Arvind Kumar (Sant Kabir Nagar), by staying his arrest. A division bench passed the order in a case where Kumar was accused of approving the registration of a bogus firm without verification, which allegedly caused loss to the state government via fraudulent Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims.
The government had filed an FIR against him and suspended him. Kumar's counsel argued that the FIR was maliciously filed after Kumar had successfully challenged his suspension and had already filed his own FIR against the fraudulent firm. The court has stayed the arrest pending further investigation.
"Incorrect facts cannot be basis for parity"
Allahabad High Court dismissed the bail plea of Waris Khan, an accused in a dacoity and murder case (IPC 396). Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh ruled that a judge is not bound by the principle of parity if a co-accused was granted bail based on incorrect or suppressed facts. Khan was seeking bail on the ground that his co-accused, Farman, had received it.
Also Watch:
However, the court noted that Farman's bail was secured by misleading the court into believing the charge sheet was not filed. Citing the Supreme Court, the High Court denied bail to Khan, emphasizing that illegalities brought to the court's notice will not be allowed to continue, especially given the severity of the crime.
