If a spouse, child, or parent is left without financial support by someone who has the means to provide it, Indian law has a specific, fast-track remedy: what most people still call “maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.” This provision has technically been renumbered — but its protective purpose remains exactly the same. This guide explains who can claim maintenance, how much they can expect, and how the process actually works today.
Dealing with a maintenance issue? Ask LawBot → — get instant, India-specific guidance in any language.
As of 1 July 2024, the old Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) has been replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) for all new criminal matters. What used to be Section 125 CrPC is now Section 144 BNSS. The substance of the law is nearly identical — courts have confirmed that five decades of Supreme Court case law built under Section 125 CrPC continues to apply to Section 144 BNSS — but if you’re filing a new case today, it will be filed under Section 144 BNSS, not Section 125 CrPC.
Since most people still search and refer to this provision by its old name, this guide uses both terms interchangeably where relevant.
This provision is a social welfare measure, not a punitive criminal law. Its purpose is to prevent vagrancy and destitution by ensuring that a person with sufficient means cannot simply neglect or refuse to support their dependents. Unlike a full civil suit, this is a summary proceeding — designed to give relatively quick relief rather than dragging on for years like ordinary civil litigation.
Under Section 144(1) BNSS (previously Section 125(1) CrPC), four categories of people can claim maintenance:
Importantly, the provision covering parents is gender-neutral on both sides — a father or mother can claim against either a son or a daughter who has sufficient means and neglects them; the obligation isn’t limited to sons.
This is a common point of confusion. No — Section 125 CrPC / Section 144 BNSS is a gender-specific protective provision; it does not allow a husband to claim maintenance from his wife, even in 2026’s more common dual-income households. However, a husband who is genuinely unable to earn (due to physical or mental disability) and whose wife has sufficient means does have a separate civil remedy:
So while the criminal, summary-procedure route under Section 144 BNSS is closed to husbands, a civil remedy under personal law remains available if dependency can be proven.
Not sure which provision applies to your situation? Ask LawBot → — 10 questions for just ₹49.
Section 144(4) BNSS (previously Section 125(4) CrPC) lists specific situations where a wife is disqualified from claiming maintenance:
The key phrase is “sufficient reason” — a wife who leaves due to cruelty, harassment, or genuine safety concerns does not lose her right to maintenance; courts examine the reason for separation carefully before applying this disqualification.
There’s no fixed formula in the statute itself — the amount is decided case by case, based on factors the Supreme Court has clarified over the years, most notably in Rajnesh v. Neha (2021), which laid down comprehensive guidelines including:
Maintenance runs from the date the application is filed, not from the date of the final order — a principle confirmed in Rajnesh v. Neha, which prevents delay in court proceedings from unfairly reducing the total amount owed.
If the person ordered to pay maintenance defaults, the law provides real enforcement teeth:
Both provisions allow a wife to claim maintenance, but they serve different purposes:
| Aspect | Section 144 BNSS | Domestic Violence Act, 2005 |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | General maintenance provision | Specifically addresses abuse/violence, with maintenance as one remedy among several |
| Who can claim | Wife, children, parents | Any woman in a domestic relationship facing violence/abuse |
| Additional relief | Monthly maintenance only | Protection orders, residence rights, monetary relief, and more |
Claimants can sometimes pursue both, though courts are generally cautious about double recovery of the same maintenance amount from multiple proceedings.
Maintenance received under a court order is generally treated as taxable income in the hands of the recipient if it exceeds the basic exemption threshold, though a lump-sum settlement can be treated differently from periodic monthly payments. It’s worth consulting a tax advisor for case-specific guidance, especially given ongoing changes to India’s income tax slab structure.
Whether you call it Section 125 CrPC or its current form, Section 144 BNSS, this provision remains one of the most practically important protections in Indian family law — a fast, enforceable mechanism ensuring that a wife, child, or dependent parent isn’t left destitute by someone who has the means to support them but refuses to. If you’re considering filing, or responding to, a maintenance claim, understanding who qualifies, how amounts are calculated, and how enforcement works will help you navigate the process with much greater clarity.
Get answers to your legal questions in minutes — in English, Hindi, or any language, based on Indian law.
Chat Credits: ₹49 for 10 questions · ₹149 for 30 · ₹499 for 100 — never expire
Legal Notice PDF: starting at ₹99, or ₹199 for editable DOCX
Ask LawBot → | Generate a Notice →
1. Is Section 125 CrPC still valid, or has it been completely replaced?
For cases filed before 1 July 2024, Section 125 CrPC still governs. For any new maintenance application filed today, it falls under Section 144 BNSS — but the underlying rights and legal principles remain the same.
2. Can a working wife still claim maintenance from her husband?
Yes, having some income doesn’t automatically disqualify a wife — courts look at whether her income is sufficient to maintain her standard of living relative to what the marriage provided, not just whether she earns anything at all.
3. How long does it take to get maintenance after filing?
While the main case can take time, courts increasingly aim to decide interim maintenance applications within roughly 60 days to prevent prolonged financial hardship, per Supreme Court guidelines in Rajnesh v. Neha. Ask LawBot if you want help understanding the timeline for your specific situation.
Disclaimer: This article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Please consult a qualified advocate before taking any legal action regarding maintenance matters.
Leave A Comment