“High Court Upholds Father’s Obligation to Pay Child Maintenance Despite the fact that the mother is employed:” High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
August 7, 2024 2024-10-15 4:23“High Court Upholds Father’s Obligation to Pay Child Maintenance Despite the fact that the mother is employed:” High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
“High Court Upholds Father’s Obligation to Pay Child Maintenance Despite the fact that the mother is employed:” High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh.
By Tanvi Mehta.
The Jammu & Kashmir High Court held that the father is liable to pay for the children’s maintenance even though the mother is working. In the instant case, the petitioner was approached by the respondents, who are minor children, through their mother, for a petition under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, Cr.P.C., before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Budgam, with claims of maintenance against the petitioner. It was further alleged that although the petitioner was in a position to do so, he failed to maintain the respondents who were compelled to live upon the wages of the mother as a schoolteacher.
The mother alleged that the father, despite being financially capable, had neglected his duty to maintain the children, forcing them to rely solely on her income as a schoolteacher. The petitioner, in his defence, claimed that he was a caring father who had been paying the children’s expenses until he became jobless. He also argued that his earnings from his time working as a technical engineer in Saudi Arabia had been handed over to his wife, who allegedly used them to purchase property in her name. The principal question brought before this court, therefore, is whether the father, the petitioner, has a legal duty to provide maintenance for his children even when their mother is employed and earning a regular income.
The High Court extensively reinforced the principle that a father is duty-bound to provide for his children. The court explicitly explained that the fact that the mother was working and earning did not absolve the legal and moral liability of the father for maintenance. It also rejected the argument of the petitioner that he should not be asked to pay maintenance as she was self-sufficient. The judgment underscored that the father’s duty to support his children remains intact, irrespective of the mother’s financial status. The court pointed out that the petitioner had failed to provide substantial evidence to prove that his current income was insufficient to meet the maintenance obligations set by the lower courts.
This ruling reaffirms the principle that a father’s responsibility to maintain his children does not diminish simply because the mother is employed. The High Court’s decision sends a clear message about the enduring obligations of parental support, emphasising that these responsibilities are not contingent upon the financial contributions of the other parent.
[Citation: CRM (M) No. 443 of 2024.]
