Supreme Court · Child Maintenance
Aditi alias Mithi v. Jitesh Sharma
Supreme Court directive mandating strict nationwide trial court adherence to mandatory asset disclosure affidavits in child maintenance proceedings.
This page summarizes the legal framework and judicial precedents for educational and informational purposes only. It does not state or imply that Advocate Sunil Kumar Upadhyay represented a party or was involved in the matter.
Background of the Child Support Dispute
The Supreme Court adjudicated an appeal concerning maintenance for a minor child under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Family Court had granted a minimal interim sum of ₹20,000 without requiring the respondent father to file a comprehensive asset and liability disclosure affidavit as mandated by earlier Supreme Court directives.
Strict Enforcement of the Rajnesh v. Neha Mandate
The Supreme Court observed with concern that Family Courts and Magistrate Courts across the country were not strictly adhering to the mandatory guideline laid down in Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) requiring both parties to file sworn Affidavits of Assets and Liabilities.
The Court issued a nationwide directive commanding all Family Courts, Magistrates, and High Courts to strictly enforce the filing of disclosure affidavits in every maintenance proceeding to prevent financial suppression.
Child's Entitlement to Father's Social & Financial Status
The Bench reaffirmed that a minor child is entitled to a standard of living consistent with the status and earning capacity of the parents. Where the father enjoys substantial income and financial prosperity, interim child maintenance must adequately cover modern schooling, healthcare, extracurricular activities, and living expenses.
