Unmarried daughter who is unable to maintain herself can claim maintenance from her father till she is married relying on Section 20(3) of HAMA, 1956.

Supreme Court on 15.09.2020 in the matter of Abhilasha Vs. Parkash Cr. Appeal No. 615/2020, has held that an unmarried daughter who is unable to maintain herself can claim maintenance from her father till she is married relying on Section 20(3) of HAMA, 1956.
Facts of the case-
The Respondent No. 2, mother of Appellant filed an application u/s 125 of Cr.P.C on behalf of her, as well as on behalf of her two sons and the appellant daughter against Respondent No.1 (her husband) claiming maintenance for her and her children. The Ld. Judicial Magistrate dismissed the said application in 16.02.2011, for Applicant No. 1, 2 & 3 and allowed the same for applicant No.4 (appellant) for grant of maintenance till she attains majority.
Thereafter, criminal revision filed before the Additional Sessions Judge was also got dismissed by order dated 17.02.2014 with the only modification that Appellant shall be entitled to maintenance till 26.04.2005 when she attains majority. He held that ‘as per provision of Section 125 Cr.P.C., the children, who had attained majority are entitled to maintenance, if by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury, they are unable to maintain themselves. However, the revisionist No.4 (i.e. appellant) is not suffering from any physical, mental abnormality or injury, she is entitled to maintenance only till 26.04.2005 i.e., till she attains majority’. Challenging the said order, an application u/s 482 of Cr.P.C was filed before the High Court wherein, the High Court upheld the impugned order and dismissed the application on 16.02.2018. Thereafter, this appeal was filed in the Hon’ble Apex Court.
Ld. Counsel for the Appellant submitted that even though the appellant had attained majority on 26.04.2005 but since she is unmarried, she is entitled to claim maintenance from her father. Relying on the provisions of Sec 20 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 and Jagdish Jugtawat Vs. Manju Lata and Others, (2002) 5 SCC 422, he submitted that as per Section 20 obligation of a person to maintain his daughter, who is unmarried, extends till she is married.
The question came up for consideration before the Court is “Whether the appellant, who although had attained majority and is still unmarried is entitled to claim maintenance from her father in proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. although she is not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality/injury?”
Observation of the Court-
The Hon’ble Apex Court pointed out that “Section 20 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, needs to be noted, which provides for maintenance of children and aged parents. The Act, 1956 was enacted to amend and codify the law relating to adoptions and maintenance among Hindus. A bare perusal of Section 125(1) Cr.P.C. as well as Section 20 of Act, 1956 indicates that whereas Section 125 Cr.P.C. limits the claim of maintenance of a child until he or she attains majority. By virtue of Section 125(1)(c), an unmarried daughter even though she has attained majority is entitled for maintenance, where such unmarried daughter is by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury is unable to maintain itself. The Scheme under Section 125(1) Cr.P.C., thus, contemplate that claim of maintenance by a daughter, who has attained majority is admissible only when by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury, she is unable to maintain herself. In the present case, the Revisional Court has returned a finding that appellant is not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or injury due to which she is unable to maintain herself. The above findings are not even questioned before us. What is contended that even if she is not suffering from any physical or mental abnormality or injury, by virtue of Section 20 of Act, 1956, she is entitled to claim maintenance till she is unmarried”.
Also, “in Classical Hindu Law prior to codification, a Hindu male was always held morally and legally liable to maintain his aged parents, a virtuous wife and infant child. Hindu Law always recognised the liability of father to maintain an unmarried daughter. In this context, we refer to paragraph 539 and 543 of Mulla – Hindu Law – 22nd Edition, which is-
543. Daughter. – (1) A father is bound to maintain his unmarried daughters. On the death of the father, they are entitled to be maintained out of his estate.”
Coming back to the provisions of Sec 20 of HAMA, 1956, the Court observed that “Section 20(3) of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 is nothing but recognition of principles of Hindu Law regarding maintenance of children and aged parents. Section 20(3) now makes it statutory obligation of a Hindu to maintain his or her daughter, who is unmarried and is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or other property. Section 20 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 cast a statutory obligation on a Hindu to maintain his daughter who is unmarried and unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or other property. As noted above, Hindu Law prior to enactment of Act, 1956 always obliged a Hindu to maintain unmarried daughter, who is unable to maintain herself. The obligation, which is cast on the father to maintain his unmarried daughter, can be enforced by her against her father, if she is unable to maintain herself by enforcing her right under Section 20.
…The right of unmarried daughter under Section 20 to claim maintenance from her father when she is unable to maintain herself is absolute and the right given to unmarried daughter under Section 20 is right granted under personal law, which can very well be enforced by her against her father. The judgment of this Court in Jagdish Jugtawat (supra) laid down that Section 20(3) of Act, 1956 recognised the right of a minor girl to claim maintenance after she attains majority till her marriage from her father. Unmarried daughter is clearly entitled for maintenance from her father till she is married even though she has become major, which is a statutory right recognised by Section 20(3) and can be enforced by unmarried daughter in accordance with law.”
However, the Apex Court also noted that “the Magistrate while deciding proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. could not have exercised the jurisdiction under Section 20(3) of Act, 1956 and the submission of the appellant cannot be accepted that the Court below should have allowed the application for maintenance even though she has become major. We do not find any infirmity in the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class as well as learned Additional Magistrate in not granting maintenance to appellant who had become major…The purpose and object of Section 125 Cr.P.C. as noted above is to provide immediate relief to applicant in a summary proceedings, whereas right under Section 20 read with Section 3(b) of Act, 1956 contains larger right, which needs determination by a Civil Court, hence for the larger claims as enshrined under Section 20, the proceedings need to be initiated under Section 20 of the Act and the legislature never contemplated to burden the Magistrate while exercising jurisdiction under 34 Section 125 Cr.P.C. to determine the claims contemplated by Act, 1956.”
The Apex Court, therefore, at last held that “as a preposition of law, an unmarried Hindu daughter can claim maintenance from her father till she is married relying on Section 20(3) of the Act, 1956, provided she pleads and proves that she is unable to maintain herself, for enforcement of which right her application/suit has to be under Section 20 of Act, 1956.”
The Appellant is given liberty to take recourse to Section 20(3) of the Act, 1956, if so advised, for claiming any maintenance against her father.