Gujarat High Court
Pankajbhai Hirabhai Boricha vs State Of Gujarat on 10 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (FOR MAINTENANCE) NO. 843 of 2018
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
PANKAJBHAI HIRABHAI BORICHA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
VIJAY H PATEL(7361) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. RAJKUMAR N DAVE(14054) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS UNNATI V PAREKH(12781) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Date : 10/04/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of the present application, the applicant has
requested this Court to quash and set aside the judgment and
order dated 27.03.2018 passed by the learned Principal Judge,
Family Court, Bhavnagar in Criminal Misc. Application No.567
of 2015.
2. It is the case of the applicant that the marriage between
the petitioner-husband and the respondent-wife was solemnized
around 20 years ago according to Hindu rites and rituals, after
which the respondent started residing at her matrimonial home
at Bhavnagar. Out of the wedlock, two children, one son and one
daughter, were born. According to the petitioner, the marital
relationship was cordial initially; however, disputes later arose
between the parties owing to the alleged aggressive nature of the
respondent-wife. It is the case of the petitioner that such
disputes were ordinary wear and tear of married life and that
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
there was no act on his part amounting to cruelty. It is further
alleged that the respondent-wife left the matrimonial home on
the pretext of visiting her parental home and thereafter deserted
the petitioner. Subsequently, the respondent-wife initiated
proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure as well as under the provisions of the Domestic
Violence Act, making various allegations against the petitioner
and his family members. The respondent-wife alleged that the
petitioner was engaged in the business of manufacturing fishing
nets and saree business and was earning Rs.60,000/- to
Rs.70,000/- per month, and accordingly claimed maintenance of
Rs.25,000/- per month. However, according to the petitioner,
without properly appreciating the evidence on record, the
learned Family Court allowed the application and awarded
maintenance of Rs.5,000/- per month from the date of the
application. Therefore, the present application.
3. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.
4. The learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the
learned Family Court has failed to properly appreciate the oral as
well as documentary evidence on record and has recorded
findings based on surmises and conjectures. According to the
applicant, the findings regarding his alleged income of
Rs.6,000/- to Rs.7,000/- per month are not supported by any
material on record, particularly when the respondent-wife herself
had alleged that he was earning Rs.60,000/- to Rs.70,000/- per
month from saree business and manufacturing of fishing nets. It
was further submitted that the applicant is merely working as a
Page 2 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
labourer and does not have any fixed source of income or any
saree business as alleged. The learned advocate further
submitted that the applicant is required to incur expenses
towards the education and maintenance of his two children, who
are residing with him, as well as household expenses and
medical expenses of his aged parents, who are senior citizens
suffering from various ailments. Lastly, it was submitted that the
learned Family Court has assigned no reasons for awarding
maintenance from the date of the application and, therefore, the
impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside.
5. The learned advocate for the respondent-wife opposed the
present application and submitted that the learned Family Court
has rightly appreciated the oral as well as documentary evidence
on record and has passed a well-reasoned order. It was
submitted that the respondent-wife had specifically stated that
the applicant was engaged in the business of sarees as well as
manufacturing fishing nets and was earning substantial income
therefrom. It was further submitted that the applicant is an able-
bodied person and is capable of earning sufficient income to
maintain the respondent-wife. The learned advocate submitted
that the respondent-wife was compelled to reside separately due
to the conduct of the applicant and his family members and that
she has no independent source of income to maintain herself. It
was also submitted that the amount of Rs.5,000/- awarded by
the learned Family Court is just, reasonable and necessary for
the sustenance of the respondent-wife, particularly considering
the rising cost of living. The learned advocate further submitted
that no error has been committed by the learned Family Court in
Page 3 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
awarding maintenance from the date of the application and,
therefore, the present application deserves to be dismissed.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
parties and after perusing the record, it appears that the
relationship between the parties is not in dispute and that
maintenance had earlier been granted in the year 2011. It is an
undisputed and admitted fact that the respondent-wife is
entitled to maintenance. The main contention raised by the
husband-applicant is that the respondent-wife is earning and is
engaged in the business of selling sarees. However, on perusal of
the documents produced at Exhibit 56, it appears that the
income certificate and documents regarding the plastic shop of
the present applicant are on record. Considering the able-bodied
status of the applicant, the prevailing rates of wages at the
relevant point of time, inflation and the dearness index, and
keeping in mind the principles laid down in Chanchalben
Pursottam Patel v. Madhukant Patel, reported in 1995
Criminal Law Reporter (Gujarat) page 582, and Kirtikant D.
Vadodariya v. State of Gujarat, reported in 1996 (2) GHL
261, the learned Family Judge has properly exercised
jurisdiction. Merely because the wife is earning some income is
not, by itself, a ground to refuse maintenance.
7. Considering the contents of the application as well as the
conclusions of the learned court, it is evident that the wife is
unable to maintain herself and has been neglected by her
husband. Furthermore, it is important to note that the mere fact
that the wife is earning or she is able to maintain herself is not a
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
valid ground to reject her claim for maintenance. In this regard,
this Court finds it appropriate to refer to the judgment delivered
by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Sunita Kachwaha and Ors. vs.
Anil Kachwaha, reported in (2014) 16 SCC 715. In that case,
the wife, who was living separately, sought maintenance from
her husband. The husband objected on the ground that the wife
had sufficient means to maintain herself, but this argument was
rejected by the Hon’ble Apex Court. It was held that merely
because the wife is earning and may be highly qualified cannot
be a reason to deny her claim for maintenance. The relevant
observation made in paragraph 9 of the judgment is reproduced
as follows:
“Inability to maintain herself is the pre-condition for grant of
maintenance to the wife. The wife must positively aver and
prove that she is unable to maintain herself, in addition to the
fact that her husband has sufficient means to maintain her
and that he has neglected to maintain her. In her evidence,
the appellant-wife has stated that only with the help of her
retired parents and brothers, she is able to maintain herself
and her daughters, while her husband’s economic condition is
quite good and the wife was entitled to maintenance.”
8. From the various judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court
as well as learned High Court, it can be said that the husband
cannot escape from his liability to maintain his wife or children
because it is the legal and ethical duty of the husband to
maintain them. It is the duty of the husband to maintain his wife
and to provide financial support to her and their children and he
cannot shirk his responsibility as husband as well as father to
maintain his legally wedded wife and children, which is his
social and lawful duty towards them and the wife and children
would be entitled to the same standard of living, which they were
Page 5 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
enjoying while living with them. In this regard reference is
required to be made in the case of Bhuwan Mohan Singh vs
Meena, reported in 2015 (6) SCC 353.
9. Further, this Court deems it apposite to refer to the
judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the cases of Usha
Rani v. Moodudula Srinivas, passed in Criminal Appeal No.
(S) of 2025 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.7660 of 2017), and
Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana, reported in (2004)
SCC OnLine SC 1686, wherein the Court held as under:
“43. In this context, I would like to advert to the vulnerability of
married women in India who do not have an independent source
of income or who do not have access to monetary resources in
their households particularly for their personal expenses. In
Indian society, it is an established practice that once a daughter
is married, she resides with her husband and/or his family
unless due to exigency of career or such other reason she has to
reside elsewhere. In the case of a woman who has an
independent source of income, she may be financially endowed
and may not be totally dependent on her husband and his family.
But what is the position of a married woman who is often
referred to as a “homemaker” and who does not have an
independent source of income, whatsoever, and is totally
dependent for her financial resources on her husband and on his
family? It is well-known that such an Indian homemaker tries to
save as much money as possible from the monthly household
budget, not only to augment the financial resources of the family
but possibly to also save a small portion for her personal
expenses. Such a practice is followed in order to avoid making a
request to the husband or his family for her personal expenses.
Most married men in India do not realise this aspect of the
predicament such Indian homemakers face as any request made
for expenses may be bluntly turned down by the husband and/or
his family. Some husbands are not conscious of the fact that the
wife who has no independent source of finance is dependent on
them not only emotionally but also financially. On the other hand,
a wife who is referred to as a homemaker is working throughout
the day for the welfare of the family without expecting anything
in return except possibly love and affection, a sense of comfort
and respect from her husband and his family which are towardsPage 6 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATIONR/CR.RA/843/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/04/2026
undefined
her emotional security. This may also be lacking in certain
households.
44. XXX
45. Therefore, I observe that an Indian married man must become
conscious of the fact that he would have to financially empower
and provide for his wife, who does not have an independent
source of income, by making available financial resources
particularly towards her personal needs; in other words, giving
access to his financial resources. Such financial empowerment
would place such a vulnerable wife in a more secure position in
the family. Those Indian married men who are conscious of this
aspect and who make available their financial resources for their
spouse towards their personal expenses, apart from household
expenditure, possibly by having a joint bank account or via an
ATM card, must be acknowledged.”
10. In the light of above it appears that the applicant has failed
to point out any patent error in the impugned order or any
miscarriage of justice. The family Court has assigned proper
reasons while passing the impugned order and therefore no case
is made out for interference with the concurrent findings. The
application fails to satisfy the test for exercising revisional
jurisdiction in light of the scope of revision laid down by the
Hon’ble Apex Court in Amit Kapoor vs. Ramesh Chander,
2012 (9) SCC 460.
11. Accordingly, the present revision application stands
dismissed. Rule is discharged.
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR,J)
ALI
Page 7 of 7
Uploaded by ALI ISTAYAK(HC01093) on Fri Apr 10 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 02:09:10 IST 2026