The Delhi High Court has ruled in a matrimonial case that a father cannot be relieved of all responsibility for his son’s school costs just because he has reached the age of adulthood. In an order, Justice Subramaniam Prasad stated that the court could not turn a blind eye to the fact that just reaching the age of a major does not mean that the major son is earning enough.
It went on to say that at the age of 18, the son is either graduating from Class XII or entering his first year of college. The aim of Section 125 CrPC, according to the court, is to guarantee that the husband’s wife and children are not left destitute following the divorce.
Read also: Banks Board Bureau cannot select Directors for PSU insurers: Delhi HC
The court also stated that a father is obligated to pay a wife who may “barely be left with enough to support herself” after spending on children. The court made the comments in response to an appeal seeking a review of an order issued by the court in June 2021, in which the husband was ordered to pay Rs 15,000 per month in interim maintenance to his wife till their kid graduates or begins working.
The guy claimed in court that the Supreme Court has ruled that child support may only be given if the children have not reached the age of majority. The son had reached majority in August 2018 in the case before the High Court. According to the court, the wife is also a gazetted official who earns more than Rs 70,000 per month and receives school costs from her work.
According to the court, women in most households are unable to work due to socio-cultural and structural barriers and hence are unable to support themselves financially. However, it did clarify that in families where women work and earn enough to support themselves, the husband is not immediately exonerated.
Read also: Delhi HC Takes Notice of Rohini Shootout
It went on to say that the court had given support to his mother rather than the major son. It also said that the argument that the wife’s employment pays for her school expenditures could not be taken into account because the husband’s responsibility to raise and educate his children remains unaffected at the end of the day.
