Sahayata & Sahayata

Introduction In a progressive and people-centric judgment, the  Delhi High Court has clarified that completion of one year of separation is not mandatory for filing a divorce by mutual consent under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 . This ruling marks a significant shift in matrimonial jurisprudence, emphasizing  individual autonomy, dignity, and practical justice over rigid statutory timelines . Court:  Delhi High Court (Full Bench) Case:   x v.  y 2025 DHC: 11467 FB Decision Date:  17 December 2025 Background of the Case The issue arose due to conflicting judicial views on whether parties must mandatorily complete  one year of separation  before filing the  first motion  for divorce by mutual consent under  Section 13B(1)  of the Hindu Marriage Act. An earlier Delhi High Court judgment ( Sankalp Singh v. Prarthana Chandra ) allowed early filing but insisted that the divorce decree could only take effect after completion of one ye...

  The Delhi High Court in Shri X v. Smt. Y & Anr. Crl Rev P. 312/2023 (2025 DHC10936) has clarified a crucial legal position: a major unmarried daughter is entitled to claim maintenance from her father under Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) , even if the petition was originally filed under Section 125 CrPC . This judgment is significant for family law practitioners, matrimonial lawyers, and litigants seeking clarity on the rights of daughters under Indian law. Why This Judgment Matters This ruling strengthens the maintenance rights of daughters in India , especially in situations where: A daughter is studying and dependent on her parents The father disputes maintainability under Section 125 CrPC A combined application is filed before the Family Court There is a risk of multiple legal proceedings The High Court clarified that Family Courts can exercise jurisdiction under both CrPC and HAMA simultaneous...

  📅 Date of Judgment: 18th December 2024 🏛️ Coram: Hon’ble Justices Avinash G. Gharote and Abhay J. Mantri 📍 Court: Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench 📝 Key Facts: Deceased Vaishali was married to Applicant No.1 – Santosh Padmagirwar . She committed suicide on 28.01.2017 by allegedly consuming tablets. FIR lodged by her father on 03.02.2017 alleged cruelty and dowry harassment against Santosh and his distant relatives (married sisters and brother-in-law). Offences alleged: Sections 498A, 306 r/w 34 IPC . The prosecution continued against all family members including those not residing with the deceased and who had been living separately in other cities . ⚖️ Issues Raised: Whether distant relatives (in-laws) who lived separately from the deceased and her husband, and against whom only vague and general allegations were made, can be subjected to criminal trial under Sections 498A and 306 IPC? 🧵 Court’s Reasoning: No Specific Allegations or Role...

The Hon'ble  Kerala High Court: Family Courts Can Review Maintenance Orders – Section 362 CrPC Not a Bar 🧑‍⚖️ Court: Kerala High Court 📍 Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.G. Arun 🗓️ Date of Judgment: 07 August 2023 📂 Case: O.P. (Crl.) No. 620 of 2022 🧾 Citation: 2023:KER:46614 Parties: Abdul Mujeeb (Petitioner) vs. Suja & Others (Respondents) 📝 Background of the Case: The wife and children of the petitioner filed a maintenance case under Section 125 CrPC , which was allowed ex parte in 2016. The petitioner failed to comply with the maintenance order. Respondents filed an execution petition (CMP 142/2019) seeking recovery of ₹1.2 lakh in arrears. Petitioner claimed he had already paid ₹2.68 lakh, including tuition fees for his children. The Family Court dismissed the execution petition , considering tuition payments as maintenance. 🔁 Review Petition and Dispute: Respondents filed a review petition (CMP 220/2022) under Section 128 CrPC , s...

  Hon'ble  Allahabad High Court Allows Recall in Dismissed Maintenance Petition: Smt. Hema & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Anr. (2024) 📌 Court: Allahabad High Court 🧑‍⚖️ Coram: Hon’ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. 🗓️ Date of Judgment: 16 May 2024 🧾 Citation: 2024:AHC:89029 👩‍⚖️ Case Type: Article 227 Petition 📂 Case No.: 6584 of 2023 🎯 Key Issue: Whether a Family Court can entertain a recall application after dismissing a Section 125 CrPC petition for non-prosecution. 📝 Brief Facts: The petitioners (Smt. Hema and her child) filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 CrPC in 2014, which was initially allowed ex parte in 2016. The ex parte order was recalled in 2018 upon the respondent husband's application. On 29.10.2022, the case was dismissed for non-prosecution by the Family Court. On the same day, the petitioners filed a recall/restoration application , which was dismissed on 02.01.2023 . The Family Court held that restora...

  🔹 Case Overview: In a crucial ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court in CRR No. 1322/2024 and CRR No. 58/2025 addressed cross-revision petitions concerning an order passed by the Family Court in a Section 125 CrPC maintenance case. The core legal question revolved around whether a woman found to be living in adultery — based on a decree of divorce granted on adultery grounds — remains entitled to claim maintenance from her husband. 🔹 Facts in Brief: Marriage Date : 11 July 2019 Separation Date : 1 March 2021 (wife left the matrimonial home) The wife, Smt. Suman Dewangan , filed for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC , claiming her husband earned over ₹1,00,000/month through employment, rental, and agricultural income. The Family Court granted ₹4,000/month as maintenance. 🔹 Husband’s Contention: Resham Lal Dewangan challenged the order, stating: He was a contractual Data Entry Operator , earning ₹17,131/month. A divorce decree was granted on 8 S...

Summary of the Bombay High Court judgment in XX v. State of Maharashtra , Criminal Application [APL] No. 515 of 2024, delivered on 25th March 2025 : 🏛️ Bombay High Court Quashes 498-A FIR Against In-Laws in Matrimonial Dispute 🔑 Case Title : XX v. State of Maharashtra Coram : Justice Pravin S. Patil and Justice Anil S. Kilor Date : 25 March 2025 Court : Nagpur Bench, Bombay High Court Application : Under Section 482 CrPC for quashing FIR 🧾 Background : The applicant-husband and 16 of his relatives (including parents, siblings, and distant relatives) were booked under: Section 498-A IPC – Cruelty by husband or relatives Section 506 IPC – Criminal intimidation Section 34 IPC – Common intention in Crime No. 0039/2024 filed at Pandarkawda Police Station, Yavatmal. The complaint by the wife alleged: Demand of ₹10 lakhs dowry Mental and physical harassment Threats and coercion to continue matrimonial relations despite illicit relationship of husband ...

Delhi High Court’s decision in Megha Khetrapal vs. Rajat Kapoor , CRL.REV.P. 273/2023 , with key legal findings , law laid down , and relevant citations : 🔍 Case Summary : Megha Khetrapal vs. Rajat Kapoor (Delhi High Court, 19 March 2025) Citation : Megha Khetrapal v. Rajat Kapoor , CRL.REV.P. 273/2023, decided on 19.03.2025 Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh Forum : Delhi High Court Provision Involved : Section 125 of CrPC (now Section 144 BNSS, 2023) – Maintenance of wife Section 19(4), Family Courts Act, 1984 Section 482 CrPC / Section 528 BNSS – Inherent powers ⚖️ Facts in Brief Megha Khetrapal sought interim maintenance from her husband, Rajat Kapoor, under Section 125 CrPC , claiming she was unemployed and financially dependent after being abandoned in Singapore. The Family Court denied interim maintenance citing her educational qualifications , work experience , and deliberate non-disclosure of her income and education. 📌 Key Legal I...

  Sankalp Singh vs Prarthana Chandra (Delhi High Court, 1 March 2013) , highlighting the key facts, legal issue, law laid down, and its significance: 🧾 Sankalp Singh vs Prarthana Chandra Citation : FAO No. 312 of 2012 | Date of Decision: 01.03.2013 Coram : Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul & Justice Rajiv Shakdher Court : Delhi High Court 🧩 Background & Key Facts: The parties were married on 19.02.2012 under Hindu rites. The marriage remained unconsummated and the couple separated within two months (on 12.04.2012). They filed a petition under Section 13B(1) (mutual consent divorce) and sought a waiver of the statutory 1-year separation period under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (HMA). The Family Court dismissed their petition citing that the one-year requirement was mandatory and not waivable except by the Supreme Court under Article 142 . ⚖️ Key Legal Issue: Can the one-year separation requirement under Section 13B(1) be waived by invo...

  INTRODUCTION This judgment by the Delhi High Court addresses the evidentiary value of DNA tests in determining paternity in the context of matrimonial disputes. The case revolves around a petitioner-husband seeking a DNA test of the child born during the subsistence of marriage, alleging infidelity by the respondent-wife. The Court was tasked with balancing the right to privacy and dignity of the child and mother with the interest of justice and the rights of the petitioner. SUMMARY The petitioner-husband filed for divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) and (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, citing cruelty and desertion. He alleged that his wife had illicit relations with another man and that the child born during their marriage was not his. He sought a DNA test of the child under Section 151 of the CPC. The Family Court dismissed the petition, holding that a DNA test cannot be ordered merely on bald allegations of infidelity without strong prima facie evidence. The husband appe...

Here is an exhaustive summary and detailed note based on the judgment in First Appeal No. 1793 of 2023 , decided by the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore on 27 March 2025 , concerning permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: Judgment: FA-1793-2023 (M.P. High Court, Indore) Case Title: Appellant (Husband) vs. Respondent (Wife) Court: High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench Judges: Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice Gajendra Singh Date of Judgment: 27th March 2025 Appeal Under: Section 28(4), Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Challenged Provision: Section 25 (Permanent Alimony and Maintenance) Background of the Case: Marriage solemnized: 08.05.2009 under Hindu rituals. Divorce Petition: Filed under Section 13(1)(ia) – on the ground of cruelty. Ex-Parte Divorce Decree: Granted by the First Additional Judge, Garoth on 17.07.2023. Maintenance Ordered: Rs. 12,000/month to the wife under Section 25 of HMA. Appeal filed by...