Allahabad HC Raps Courts for Ignoring DV Maintenance

Allahabad High Court Questions Magistrate and Revisional Court for Ignoring Maintenance Orders Under Domestic Violence Act

Court Seeks Explanation on Why Lower Courts Failed to Enforce Women’s Right to Maintenance

Judges Stress That Maintenance Is a Legal Right, not a Matter of Judicial Discretion

By Our Legal Reporter

New Delhi: October 22, 2025: The Allahabad High Court has pulled up a magistrate and a revisional court for failing to enforce maintenance directions under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act). The High Court observed that ignoring such directions undermines the very purpose of the law, which was enacted to protect women from economic and social vulnerability in abusive domestic relationships.

The court has now sought a detailed explanation from both the magistrate and the revisional court, asking why they disregarded the statutory mandate of providing maintenance to an aggrieved woman.

Background of the Case

The case arose from a petition filed by a woman under the DV Act, seeking maintenance from her husband. The trial magistrate had initially passed an order granting her interim maintenance. However, when the woman approached the court again for enforcement, the magistrate and later the revisional court failed to act on the directions.

Frustrated by the inaction, the woman approached the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the lower courts had effectively denied her the relief guaranteed under the DV Act.

High Court’s Observations

A single-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court expressed strong displeasure at the conduct of the lower courts. The judge noted that:

Maintenance is a statutory right under the DV Act and cannot be denied once ordered.
The failure of the magistrate and revisional court to enforce the order amounted to a serious lapse in judicial duty.
Such inaction defeats the very purpose of the DV Act, which is to provide immediate relief to women facing domestic violence.

The court emphasized that maintenance is not a matter of judicial generosity, but a legal entitlement designed to ensure that women are not left destitute during or after abusive relationships.

Why Maintenance Matters

The DV Act, 2005 was enacted to provide civil remedies to women facing domestic violence. One of its most important provisions is the right to seek monetary relief, including maintenance, to cover expenses for food, shelter, medical treatment, and education of children.

Legal experts point out that maintenance is crucial because many women are financially dependent on their husbands or partners. Without timely maintenance, they may be forced into poverty or compelled to continue living in abusive households.

By ignoring maintenance directions, courts risk leaving women without the support the law was specifically designed to provide.

Judicial Accountability

The High Court’s decision to seek explanations from the magistrate and revisional court is significant. It signals that judicial officers can be held accountable for failing to uphold statutory rights.

The court observed that when a law clearly mandates relief, lower courts cannot refuse or delay enforcement. Doing so not only harms the litigant but also erodes public confidence in the justice system.

Past Precedents

This is not the first time the Allahabad High Court has intervened in matters of maintenance under the DV Act. In earlier rulings, the court has consistently stressed that:

Maintenance must be granted promptly.
Courts should adopt a pro-woman interpretation of the DV Act, in line with its legislative intent.
Delays or denials in granting maintenance defeat the object of the law.

In July 2025, for example, the High Court ruled that no maintenance can be claimed under the DV Act if a marriage is declared void ab initio. However, in valid marriages or domestic relationships, the court has repeatedly emphasized the mandatory nature of maintenance orders.

Broader Implications

The High Court’s latest intervention has broader implications for the functioning of the judiciary:

Strengthening Women’s Rights: It reinforces the idea that women’s rights under the DV Act are not optional but binding.
Judicial Discipline: It reminds lower courts that they must faithfully implement statutory provisions.
Public Trust: It helps restore confidence among litigants that higher courts will step in when justice is denied at the grassroots level.

Reactions from Legal Experts

Legal experts have welcomed the High Court’s move. Senior advocates noted that maintenance is often the most critical relief for women in domestic violence cases. Any delay in granting or enforcing it can cause irreparable harm.

Some lawyers also pointed out that lower courts sometimes treat maintenance as a discretionary matter, when in fact the law makes it a mandatory relief. The High Court’s order, they said, will serve as a corrective measure.

The Road Ahead

The Allahabad High Court has directed the magistrate and revisional court to submit their explanations. Depending on their responses, the High Court may issue further directions to ensure compliance with the DV Act.

Observers believe this case could set a precedent for greater judicial accountability in matters of women’s rights. It may also encourage women to approach higher courts when they feel their statutory rights are being ignored.

Conclusion

The Allahabad High Court’s decision to seek explanations from lower courts for ignoring maintenance directions under the DV Act is a powerful reminder that women’s rights cannot be sidelined. Maintenance is not charity—it is a legal right designed to protect women from destitution and ensure dignity in the face of domestic violence.

By holding judicial officers accountable, the High Court has reinforced the principle that justice must not only be done but must also be seen to be done. For women across Uttar Pradesh and beyond, the ruling offers hope that the judiciary will stand firm in protecting their rights.