Maintenance Affidavit Rules: Kusum Sharma Order and Later Supreme Court Guidelines
The Delhi High Court in Kusum Sharma v. Mahinder Kumar Sharma, FAO 369/1996, modified its maintenance-disclosure procedure on 6 December 2017. The direction that an assets, income and expenditure affidavit need not accompany the initial petition or written statement must now be read alongside later decisions, especially the Supreme Court ruling in Rajnesh v. Neha (2020).
Background of the 6 December 2017 order
Justice J. R. Midha considered practical difficulties arising from the Delhi High Court directions dated 14 January 2015 and 29 May 2017. Those directions sought prompt adjudication of maintenance applications by requiring parties to disclose their financial circumstances. Family Courts and the amicus curiae reported that gathering documents before filing substantive pleadings could delay proceedings and burden litigants with limited means.
The High Court therefore directed that the parties should ordinarily file their affidavits of assets, income and expenditure simultaneously after completion of pleadings, rather than necessarily with the petition or written statement. This avoided a tactical advantage to the party disclosing later and allowed time to compile financial records. The Family Courts were directed to display the revised filing instruction on their notice boards by 21 December 2017.
Why the earlier directions were modified
- Requiring an affidavit with the petition could give the respondent an unfair informational advantage.
- Collecting financial records at the outset could delay the filing of pleadings.
- Litigants from economically disadvantaged backgrounds could have difficulty preparing extensive disclosures.
- Some uncontested or exceptional cases might not require the full affidavit, subject to the court's directions.
Subsequent legal developments: 2020 rulings
Delhi High Court: Kusum Sharma, 6 August 2020
The Delhi High Court again revised the disclosure formats and directions in Kusum Sharma v. Mahinder Kumar Sharma, FAO 369/1996, on 6 August 2020. It treated the financial affidavit as a tool for establishing the parties' true financial position and recognized judicial discretion, for recorded reasons, to tailor or dispense with particular disclosures in appropriate cases. This later judgment expressly modified the earlier 2017 framework.
Read the Delhi High Court judgment dated 6 August 2020.
Supreme Court: Rajnesh v. Neha, 4 November 2020
In Rajnesh v. Neha, Criminal Appeal No. 730 of 2020, the Supreme Court issued nationwide directions for financial disclosure in maintenance proceedings. The applicant is ordinarily required to file a concise maintenance application with an affidavit of disclosure of assets and liabilities; the respondent must file the reply with the affidavit within the prescribed period, ordinarily four weeks. The prescribed formats account for differing circumstances, including agrarian and non-agrarian deponents.
These nationwide directions are central to present-day maintenance practice. Parties should not rely on the 2017 Delhi order alone to omit a financial affidavit. Read the Supreme Court judgment and affidavit formats (official court-hosted PDF).
Relevant statutory provisions
Section 24, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Section 24 permits a spouse without sufficient independent income to seek maintenance pendente lite (financial support during matrimonial proceedings) and expenses of the proceedings. The court considers the incomes and circumstances of both spouses. The provision contemplates disposal of the application, as far as possible, within 60 days of service of notice. See the official Hindu Marriage Act text.
Other maintenance proceedings
Maintenance and financial disclosure may also arise under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and other applicable family-law statutes. The former Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, addressed maintenance of wives, children and parents; for proceedings governed by the new criminal procedure framework, Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, addresses maintenance of wives, children and parents. The applicable procedural law and transitional provisions should be checked for each case.
Practical guidance for parties in maintenance cases
- Prepare accurate disclosures of earnings, bank accounts, property, liabilities, dependants and household expenses in the format required by the court.
- Attach relevant supporting records and disclose existing maintenance orders in other proceedings to avoid inconsistent or overlapping awards.
- Comply with the filing timetable fixed by the court; non-compliance may affect the determination of interim maintenance.
- Where genuine hardship prevents full disclosure, seek a specific, reasoned direction from the court rather than assuming an automatic exemption.
Original Delhi High Court order dated 6 December 2017
The original order in Kusum Sharma v. Mahinder Kumar Sharma includes modified directions and Annexure A1, the then-prescribed affidavit format. It remains useful for understanding the evolution of maintenance procedure, but later rulings must be consulted before using its format in a current filing.
Read original 2017 order and Annexure A1 (PDF)
This article explains the historical decision and subsequent legal developments. The precise affidavit format and procedural requirements may depend on current binding directions and orders in the particular case.