How to File a Petition for Maintenance underBNSS: A Step-by Step Guide for Minor Child Maintenance
Abstract
This article provides an analytical evaluation of the transition from Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, to Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, specifically focusing on the statutory mechanism for claiming minor child maintenance. While the foundational principles of preventing destitution remain intact, the BNSS framework introduces time-bound statutory limits for interim maintenance applications and rigorous enforcement procedures to safeguard the financial rights of the child. Moving beyond a superficial review of procedural rules, this study evaluates the exact jurisdictional thresholds, evidentiaryrequirements, and procedural steps necessary to navigate anapplication before a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class. It further synthesizes landmark precedents to present a forward-looking perspective on child rights under India’s overhauled criminal procedure.
Introduction
The obligation of a parent to maintain their minor child is afoundational tenet of social welfare, rooted in the socio-legal imperative to protect vulnerable dependents from abandonment and destitution. In India, while personal laws provide mechanisms for child support, the criminal procedural framework has historically offered a swift, secular, and effective summary remedy irrespective of the parties’ religious affiliations.
With the enforcement of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, the classic statutory tool previously known as Section 125 of the CrPC has been re-engineered and re-codified under Section 144 of the BNSS. Ensuring that a minor child receives timely financial support for sustenance,education, and medical needs is no longer just a familialexpectation—it is an enforceable statutory right rigorously monitored by the judiciary. This guide breaks down the concrete procedural architecture of filing a maintenance petition under Section 144 of the
BNSS specifically for a minor child, bridging the gap betweenstatutory language and courtroom reality.
The Legal Framework of Section 144 BNSS
To successfully initiate a claim, it is essential to isolate the corestatutory components of Section 144 of the BNSS, 2023. UnderSection 144(1)(b), a person who possesses “sufficient means”but “neglects or refuses” to maintain their child is liable to pay a monthly allowance.
Key Statutory Pillars for Minor Claims:
Scope of Eligibility: The clause expressly covers both legitimateand illegitimate children, whether married or not, who are unable to maintain themselves.
The Minority Standard: Maintenance is primarily claimable until the child reaches majority. However, the first proviso to Section 144(1) establishes that if a female minor child is married, andher husband does not possess sufficient financial means, theMagistrate can direct the father to pay maintenance until she attains majority.
The Statutory Innovation (Time-Bound Interim Relief): One of the most progressive structural overhauls within the BNSS is thethird proviso to Section 144(1). It mandates that an application for interim maintenance and legal expenses must, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty
(60) days from the date of the service of notice to the respondent. This effectively curtails the systemic delays that previously plagued old CrPC proceedings.
Step-by-Step Procedure to File the Petition
Filing a petition under Section 144 of the BNSS involves asystematic five-stage procedural roadmap designed to withstand aggressive defense strategies:
Step 1: Jurisdictional Determination and Forum Selection
The application must be filed before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class (JMFC). To determine the appropriate territorial jurisdiction, the petitioner can file the case in any district where:
The flexibility to file where the child currently resides ensuresthat a custodian mother or guardian does not face undue travel hardships.
Step 2: Drafting the Comprehensive Petition
The petition must be structured meticulously, breaking awayfrom generalizations. It must explicitly state:
The Relationship: Unambiguous proof of parentage (birthcertificate, school records, or hospital data).
Inability to Maintain: A clear statement that the minor child hasno independent income or property and is wholly dependent on the applicant/guardian.
Sufficient Means of the Respondent: Detailed asset and incomeprofiles of the defaulting parent.
Neglect or Refusal: Factual incidents illustrating that therespondent has failed to provide food, clothing, education, or medical care despite having financial means.
Step 3: Service of Notice and Mandatory Affidavits
Once the petition is formally presented, the Magistrate issues anofficial notice to the respondent. In alignment with modern procedural mandates, the applicant must file a comprehensive Affidavit of Assets and Liabilities at the initial stage. This forces immediate, transparent financial disclosure from both sides, stripping away the possibility of income suppression.
Step 4: Pressing for Interim Maintenance
Simultaneously with the main petition, an Interim Maintenance Application must be moved. Relying on the 60-day statutorywindow introduced by the BNSS, the advocate should actively
argue for immediate financial relief to cover immediaterequirements like school tuition fees or medical premiums while the main trial is pending.
Step 5: Trial, Evidence, and Final Order
During the trial phase, both parties submit documentary evidence and oral testimonies. The petitioner must prove the real-world expenses of the child (school fee receipts, medical bills, basic grocery metrics). Upon satisfaction, the JMFC passesa binding final order directing a fixed monthly allowance.
Critical Evaluation and Judicial Precedent Analysis
A superficial reading of the statute suggests that maintenance is an absolute right; however, judicial interpretation clarifies that it is an equitable, balance-based remedy. The judiciary has shiftedfrom considering maintenance as a standard “dole” to treating itas an instrument of social justice designed to ensure a minor lifewith the same dignity they would have enjoyed in a shared household.
Landmark Precedent Integration:
Burden of Proof & Financial Reality: In Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008), the Supreme Court highlighted that the phrase “unable to maintain herself/himself” refers to the target’s actual financial status and living conditions, rather than a total state ofabsolute destitution. For a minor child, this means the standard of maintenance must mirror the social and financial status of the father.
The Disclosure Mandate: The procedural standard for maintenance trials across India remains deeply rooted in thelandmark ruling of Rajnesh v. Neha (2020). The Supreme Courtestablished that overlapping maintenance claims under multiple laws must be adjusted, and both parties are legally compelled to file standardized financial affidavits. In a BNSS Section 144 proceeding, a failure to disclose assets accurately constitutes a direct ground for adverse judicial inference.
Real-World Pitfalls: Recent High Court observations indicate that courts are increasingly strict about arbitrary expense claims. If a custodian parent alters a minor school format to drastically inflate expenses without prior consultation or documentaryreceipts, the defense can aggressively
challenge the proportionality of the claim. Hence, every rupeedemanded for the child must be backed by traceable bills.
Conclusion & Reform-Oriented Perspective
Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, represents a robust legislative stride toward mitigating the vulnerabilities of minor children caught in familial discord. By embedding a 60-day target for interim application disposal, thelegislature has directly addressed the historical flaw of protracted matrimonial litigation.
However, for this framework to achieve absolute efficacy, thereis a pressing need for institutional reforms:
Ultimately, Section 144 BNSS is not a tool for marital retaliation; it is a shield for child preservation. Legalpractitioners and interns must approach these filings withtechnical precision, ensuring that the legal scaffolding is entirelysupported by traceable evidence, objective financial tracking, and an unwavering focus on the best interests of the child.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
Q1. What is the main difference between the old Section 125CrPC and the new Section 144 BNSS regarding minor child maintenance?
While the substantive right of a minor child to claim maintenance remains the same, the key difference lies in procedural efficiency. Section 144 BNSS introduces a strict, time-bound statutory limit for interim relief. The third proviso to Section 144(1) mandates that an application for interimmaintenance must, as far as possible, be disposed of within 60 days from the date the notice is served to the respondent. This directly tackles the systemic delays common under the old CrPC.
Q2. Where can a maintenance petition for a minor child befiled under the BNSS?
The territorial jurisdiction is governed by the convenience of the child and the guardian. Under Section 144, the petition can befiled before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class (JMFC) in any district where:
Q3. Can an illegitimate minor child claim maintenanceunder Section 144 BNSS?
Yes. The statutory language of Section 144(1)(b) explicitly includes both legitimate and illegitimate minor children (whether married or unmarried) who are unable to maintain themselves. The focus of the law is on biological parentage andthe prevention of destitution, not the marital status of the parents.
Q4. Under what circumstances can a father be ordered tomaintain a married minor daughter?
According to the first proviso of Section 144(1) BNSS, if a female minor child is married, the primary responsibility to maintain her lies with her husband. However, if the Magistrate is satisfied that the husband does not possess “sufficient means,”the court can direct the father to pay maintenance to his married minor daughter until she attains the age of majority.
Q5. What is the role of the “Affidavit of Assets andLiabilities” in these proceedings?
In line with the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Rajnesh v. Neha (2020), both parties are legally required to file a comprehensive disclosure affidavit at the initial stage of the proceedings. This forces immediate transparency regarding incomes, assets, and liabilities, making it much harder for adefaulting parent to suppress their income or hide assets toevade child support.
Q6. How is the quantum (amount) of maintenancedetermined for a minor child?
The court does not use a rigid mathematical formula. Instead, itbalances the real-world needs of the child against the financial capacity of the parent. Based on Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai (2008), “unable to maintain” does not mean absolute destitution. Thequantum is calculated to ensure the child enjoys a standard of living reasonably proportional to the social and financial status of the defaulting parent, covering actual expenses like school fees, medical bills, and daily sustenance.
Q7. What legal remedies are available if a parent refuses topay the ordered maintenance amount?
Under Section 144(3) of the BNSS, if a parent fails to comply with the court’s order without sufficient cause, the Magistrate can issue a warrant for levying the amount due (similar to a warrant for collecting fines). If the amount remains unpaid afterthe execution of the warrant, the court can sentence the defaulting person to imprisonment for a term extending up to one month, or until payment is made, for every month’s breach.
References
