Bombay High Court rules major unmarried daughters can claim maintenance

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has ruled that the availability of alternative remedies under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA) does not prevent a major unmarried daughter from claiming maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

In dismissing a criminal revision petition filed by a father, Justice Mehroz K. Pathan upheld a Family Court order requiring the father to pay ₹7,000 per month each to his daughter and son. The father had argued that because the daughter had attained majority, she should only be able to seek relief under Section 20(3) of HAMA.

The Court noted that maintenance cannot be denied under Section 125 CrPC simply because another legal avenue exists, especially when the father fails to prove the daughter is capable of maintaining herself. The ruling drew upon a Supreme Court precedent, Jagdish Jugtawat v. Manju Lata, to support the decision.