Maintenance Under Section 144 BNSS – Key Legal Principles (With Relevant Case Laws)
Maintenance is one of the most important legal remedies available to a wife, child, or parent who is unable to maintain themselves. Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) was enacted as a social justice measure to prevent destitution and vagrancy. Though placed in a criminal procedural statute, the provision is essentially civil in nature and aims at immediate financial relief.
The direct answer is this: Section 144 BNSS provides a speedy and summary remedy by which a wife (including a divorced wife), minor children, major disabled children, and dependent parents can claim monthly maintenance from a person who has sufficient means but neglects or refuses to maintain them.
This article explains in detail the scope, eligibility, conditions, quantum, defenses, enforcement, and important judicial precedents governing maintenance under Section 144 BNSS.
1. Nature and Objective of Section 144 BNSS
Section 144 BNSS is a secular provision applicable to all religions. It is designed to prevent destitution by compelling those who can support their dependents to do so.
In Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena (2015) 6 SCC 353, the Supreme Court observed that the object of Section 144 is to ameliorate the agony, anguish, and financial suffering of a woman who has left her matrimonial home.
The provision is summary in nature, meaning:
- Proceedings are faster than regular civil trials.
- Strict rules of evidence are relaxed.
- The focus is on immediate relief.
The purpose is not punishment but social protection.
2. Who Can Claim Maintenance Under Section 144 BNSS?
Section 144(1) specifies four categories of claimants:
(1) Wife
The term “wife” includes:
- Legally wedded wife.
- Divorced wife who has not remarried.
In Rohtash Singh v. Ramendri (2000) 3 SCC 180, the Supreme Court held that even a divorced wife is entitled to maintenance unless she has remarried.
However, a second wife whose marriage is void may not qualify as “wife,” though she may seek relief under other laws such as the Domestic Violence Act.
(2) Minor Child
Legitimate or illegitimate minor child can claim maintenance.
The obligation exists irrespective of marital disputes.
(3) Major Child (If Disabled)
A major child who is unable to maintain itself due to physical or mental abnormality is entitled.
(4) Parents
Father or mother who are unable to maintain themselves can claim maintenance.
In Kirtikant D. Vadodaria v. State of Gujarat (1996) 4 SCC 479, the Supreme Court emphasized that parents include adoptive parents but not step-parents unless special circumstances exist.
3. Essential Ingredients for Grant of Maintenance
To succeed under Section 144, the applicant must prove:
- Relationship (wife, child, or parent).
- Neglect or refusal to maintain.
- Inability to maintain oneself.
- Respondent has sufficient means.
Each ingredient is examined carefully by the Magistrate.
4. What Is “Neglect or Refusal”?
Neglect can be:
- Express refusal.
- Implied conduct (abandonment, no financial support).
Even if the husband does not directly say “I refuse,” consistent non-payment of expenses amounts to neglect.
Courts interpret neglect broadly to ensure protection of dependents.
5. What Is “Sufficient Means”?
“Sufficient means” does not mean actual visible income only.
In Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008) 2 SCC 316, the Supreme Court held:
A person capable of earning cannot escape liability merely because he is not actually earning.
Thus, courts examine:
- Educational qualifications.
- Employment potential.
- Lifestyle.
- Assets.
Intentional unemployment is not a valid defence.
6. Maintenance for Divorced Wife
A divorced woman is entitled to maintenance unless she remarries.
In Vanamala v. H.M. Ranganatha Bhatta (1995) 5 SCC 299, it was held that a divorced wife continues to be entitled even if divorce was obtained on grounds of her fault.
Thus, fault-based divorce does not automatically bar maintenance.
7. When Wife Is Not Entitled
Section 144(4) bars maintenance if:
- Wife is living in adultery.
- Wife refuses to live with husband without sufficient reason.
- Parties are living separately by mutual consent.
In Bhagwan Dutt v. Kamla Devi (1975) 2 SCC 386, the Court clarified that sufficient cause for refusal includes cruelty or dowry harassment.
8. Quantum of Maintenance
There is no fixed formula.
Courts consider:
- Husband’s income.
- Wife’s needs.
- Standard of living.
- Number of dependents.
- Liabilities.
In Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) 2 SCC 324, the Supreme Court issued comprehensive guidelines:
- Mandatory disclosure of assets and income.
- Uniform format of affidavits.
- Maintenance should be fair and reasonable.
The Court emphasized avoiding multiplicity of maintenance orders under different laws.
9. Interim Maintenance
Section 144 permits interim maintenance during pendency of proceedings.
The Supreme Court in Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena (2015) stressed that delay in granting maintenance defeats purpose.
Courts aim to decide interim maintenance expeditiously.
10. Maintenance of Working Wife
A working wife is not automatically disentitled.
In Shailja & Anr. v. Khobbanna (2018) 12 SCC 199, the Court held:
Merely because wife is capable of earning is not sufficient to deny maintenance.
The test is whether she can maintain herself in same standard as husband.
11. Maintenance of Child
Children are entitled regardless of marital conflict.
In Jagdish Jugtawat v. Manju Lata (2002) 5 SCC 422, the Supreme Court extended maintenance even beyond minority for unmarried daughter pursuing education.
Child’s welfare is paramount.
12. Maintenance to Parents
Parents can claim from sons and daughters.
Moral obligation has been converted into legal obligation.
Senior citizens also have remedies under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007.
13. Overlapping Remedies
Maintenance can be claimed under:
- Section 144 BNSS.
- Hindu Marriage Act (Section 24 & 25).
- Domestic Violence Act.
- Special Marriage Act.
In Rajnesh v. Neha (2021), the Supreme Court held that courts must adjust overlapping maintenance to prevent duplication.
14. Burden of Proof
Initial burden lies on applicant.
Once neglect and relationship are established, burden shifts to respondent to prove inability.
Courts adopt liberal approach in favour of dependent spouse.
15. Enforcement of Maintenance Order
If maintenance is not paid:
- Warrant may be issued.
- Imprisonment up to one month for each default.
However, imprisonment does not wipe out liability.
Repeated defaults can lead to repeated imprisonment.
16. Limitation for Recovery
Application for recovery must be made within one year from date amount became due.
Courts may condone delay in appropriate cases.
17. Enhancement or Modification
Under Section 146 BNSS, maintenance can be modified if:
- Change in income.
- Change in circumstances.
- Inflation.
Either party can seek alteration.
18. Maintenance and Muslim Law
In Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) 2 SCC 556, the Supreme Court held that Muslim women are entitled under Section 144 BNSS.
Later, the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 was enacted.
In Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) 7 SCC 740, the Court interpreted the Act to ensure fair and reasonable provision for divorced Muslim women.
Thus, Section 144 remains a secular remedy.
19. Key Judicial Principles Summarized
- Section 144 is social justice legislation.
- Remedy is summary and speedy.
- Divorced wife is entitled unless remarried.
- Husband cannot avoid liability by unemployment.
- Working wife may still be entitled.
- Maintenance must be fair and realistic.
- Overlapping maintenance must be adjusted.
20. Practical Considerations for Litigants
- File detailed affidavit of income.
- Disclose assets honestly.
- Avoid suppression of income.
- Maintain proof of expenses.
- Seek interim relief early.
Accurate disclosure strengthens case credibility.
Conclusion
Maintenance under Section 144 BNSS is a powerful social welfare provision designed to protect wives, children, and parents from financial destitution. It provides a speedy, summary, and secular remedy against neglect by a person having sufficient means.
Judicial interpretation through landmark cases such as Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena (2015), Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008), Rajnesh v. Neha (2021), and Shah Bano (1985) has expanded and clarified its scope. Courts have consistently emphasized that maintenance is not charity but a legal right.
Ultimately, Section 144 reflects the constitutional vision of social justice and dignity. It ensures that no dependent family member is left helpless due to neglect or refusal of financial support by those legally bound to maintain them.
Disclaimer: This information is intended for general guidance only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult with a qualified lawyer for personalized advice specific to your situation.
Advocate J.S. Rohilla (Civil & Criminal Lawyer in Indore)
Contact: 88271 22304