SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed an order directing a senior citizen to pay monthly maintenance to his two major unmarried daughters, ruling that the provision under which the claim was made did not legally apply to them.
Justice Rahul Bharti, presiding over the matter at the Srinagar wing of the High Court, observed that Section 488 of the Jammu and Kashmir Code of Criminal Procedure, Svt. 1989, which governed maintenance claims at the time, does not entitle adult children—unless suffering from physical or mental incapacity—to seek maintenance from their parents.
The petitioner, Abdul Raheem Bhat, had found himself “caught between the devil and the deep sea”, the court noted, when his two daughters and son filed a petition for maintenance against him in 2014. At the time, all three were adults. In a parallel proceeding that same year, Bhat had sought maintenance from his son, claiming he himself was dependent. That petition was allowed in 2017, entitling him to Rs 2,000 per month.
However, in 2019, the Judicial Magistrate First Class in Anantnag directed Bhat to pay Rs 1,200 each to his two daughters, effective from July 2014. His challenge to that order failed before the Sessions Court in 2021, prompting the present petition before the High Court.
The High Court found that the lower courts had overlooked a key provision of the law, which restricts maintenance rights to major children only if they are physically or mentally incapable of supporting themselves.
Calling the previous orders “illegal”, the court set them aside, thereby relieving Bhat of the Rs 2,400 monthly liability.
The petition was allowed and disposed of accordingly.
