In Shilpa v. K.K. Rajeevan & Another. [2024: KER:41790], Justice P.G. Ajithkumar of the Kerala High Court held that when Magistrates issue maintenance orders under Section 20(1)(d) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (DV Act), they must clearly specify whether the maintenance is granted under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) or Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA).
The High Court clarified that maintenance under the DV Act could be ordered under either provision, each carrying different conditions and durations:
- Under Section 125 CrPC, the obligation to pay maintenance to a daughter ceases upon her attaining majority, unless she suffers from a physical or mental condition preventing self-sufficiency.
- Under Section 20(3) HAMA, the obligation continues until the daughter’s marriage or until she becomes self-sufficient, and exemption from such maintenance requires the father to prove the daughter’s disqualification.
