The High Court of Uttarakhand, in a significant ruling, has held that a mother cannot waive her minor child’s right to claim maintenance from the father as part of a mutual divorce settlement. The court affirmed that the right of a minor child to be maintained by their parents is an independent right that cannot be contracted away by the parents.
Justice Pankaj Purohit dismissed a criminal revision petition filed by a father challenging a Family Court’s order that directed him to pay interim maintenance to his minor daughter, despite an affidavit from the mother forgoing any such claim.
The court, in its order dated June 24, 2025, found “no illegality or perversity” in the lower court’s decision, stating that the revision petition “lacks merit and the same is dismissed at the threshold.”
Background of the Case
The case originated from an order passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, on March 21, 2025. The Family Court had partly allowed a maintenance application filed by a mother on behalf of her minor daughter against her former husband.
The mother and father were married on April 14, 2011, and their marriage was dissolved by a decree of divorce on January 11, 2024. Subsequently, the mother filed an application seeking Rs. 30,000 per month as interim maintenance for their minor daughter. She contended that the father was employed as a Manager in a health company and also worked as an LIC agent, earning a total monthly income of approximately Rs. 60,000.
Arguments of the Parties
The revisionist father contested the maintenance application before the Family Court. His primary argument was that the divorce was granted based on a mutual compromise. He stated that as per the conditions of the divorce, all stridhan had been returned to the mother, who in turn had submitted an affidavit to the court declaring that “she would not file any kind of case for maintenance either for herself or her daughter.” Based on this affidavit, the father prayed for the rejection of the maintenance application.
Family Court’s Findings
The Principal Judge of the Family Court, Dehradun, after examining the matter, directed the father to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 8,000 per month to his daughter from the date the application was filed (October 25, 2024).
The Family Court recorded a finding that the father had a monthly income of Rs. 60,000, besides Rs. 35,000 to Rs. 50,000 from other business activities, and noted that he had not disclosed any facts about his income in his written statement.
Citing authorities from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court, the trial court held that a minor child remains entitled to maintenance even after the parents’ divorce. The court underscored that the duty to maintain the child, who was residing with her mother, was upon the father. The most crucial finding of the Family Court was that “any settlement between applicant-husband and respondent-wife cannot be made in respect of rights of minor child.”
High Court’s Decision
Aggrieved by the Family Court’s order, the father filed a criminal revision petition before the Uttarakhand High Court under Section 438 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.
Justice Pankaj Purohit, delivering the oral judgment, upheld the reasoning of the Family Court. The High Court concurred that the duty to maintain the child lies with the father and that this right cannot be nullified by a private agreement between the parents.
The High Court observed, “the court rightly awarded an interim maintenance @ Rs.8,000/- per month for the maintenance of daughter of respondent-wife.”
Concluding the matter, Justice Purohit stated, “In my opinion, there is no illegality or perversity in the impugned judgment nor any ground is made out to interfere with the said finding.” The revision petition was consequently dismissed.
