Section 125 CrPC vs Section 144 BNSS — Maintenance of Wives, Children and Parents (CrPC 125-128)

In India, Sections 144 to 147 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced the maintenance provisions, Sections 125 to 128 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), on 1 July 2024. The scheme is carried over; the BNSS drops the word "minor" from clause (b) and adds the parents' district as a place to file.

At a glance

Maintenance proceedings create no offence, so neither First Schedule classifies them.

What changed

• Modified — Section 144(1)(b). "his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself" becomes "his legitimate or illegitimate child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself".
• Modified — first proviso to Section 144(1). "the father of a minor female child referred to in clause (b)" becomes "the father of a female child referred to in clause (b)"; "such minor female child" becomes "such female child". The words "until she attains her majority" stay.
• Omitted — Explanation (a). Section 125 defined "minor" by reference to the Indian Majority Act, 1875. Section 144 keeps only the definition of "wife": "a woman who has been divorced by, or has obtained a divorce from, her husband and has not remarried".
• Minor edit — Section 144(1) clauses. The commas before "or" between clauses (a) to (c) become semicolons.
• Identical — interim maintenance and the sixty-day target. The second and third provisos, inserted in Section 125(1) by Act 50 of 2001 (w.e.f. 24-9-2001), are repeated word for word. Certain words limiting the monthly rate were omitted from Section 125(1) by the same Act; Section 144(1) has no ceiling either.
• Identical — Sections 144(2) and 144(3). Payment date, warrant, one month's imprisonment per unpaid month, the one-year limit for levy applications, and the rule that a husband's second marriage or keeping a mistress is "just ground" for the wife's refusal to live with him.
• Minor edit — Section 144(4). "as the case may be," after "expenses of proceeding" is dropped; the three disqualifications are unchanged.
• Not compared — Section 144(5). The BNSS text ends "the Magistrate shall cancel the order". The CrPC text in the India Code edition used for this page is truncated after "living separately by mutual consent." and reads "in living in adultery", so the old operative words could not be read.
• Expanded — Section 145. New clause (1)(d): proceedings may be taken where the respondent's "father or mother resides". In Section 145(2) "pleader" becomes "advocate"; in Section 145(1) and (3) "section 125" becomes "section 144".
• Minor edit — Section 146. Cross-references change from Section 125 to Section 144 and a comma after "Magistrate that" is dropped in sub-section (2).
• Identical — Section 147. Same words as Section 128.
• State amendments — note. The CrPC text records Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal amendments to Section 125; whether any State has amended Section 144 BNSS was not checked.

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract, Section 125(1)(b) CrPC (repealed from 1 July 2024):

(b) his legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself, or

Extract, Section 144(1) BNSS, clause (b), second and third provisos:

(b) his legitimate or illegitimate child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself; or

Provided further that the Magistrate may, during the pendency of the proceeding regarding monthly allowance for the maintenance under this sub-section, order such person to make a monthly allowance for the interim maintenance of his wife or such child, father or mother, and the expenses of such proceeding which the Magistrate considers reasonable, …

Provided also that an application for the monthly allowance for the interim maintenance and expenses of proceeding under the second proviso shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days from the date of the service of notice of the application to such person.

Extract, Section 145(1)(d) BNSS:

(d) where his father or mother resides.

How it works — the ingredients and steps

1. Who pays (s.144(1)). "any person having sufficient means" who "neglects or refuses to maintain" the claimant.
2. Who can claim (s.144(1)(a)-(d)). A wife unable to maintain herself, including a divorced wife who has not remarried (Explanation); a legitimate or illegitimate child, married or not, unable to maintain itself; an adult child (not a married daughter) unable to maintain itself because of physical or mental abnormality or injury; a father or mother unable to maintain himself or herself.
3. Who decides. A Magistrate of the first class, "upon proof of such neglect or refusal", at "such monthly rate as such Magistrate thinks fit".
4. Where (s.145(1)). Any district where the respondent is, where he or his wife resides, where he last resided with his wife or the mother of an illegitimate child, or where his father or mother resides.
5. Hearing (s.145(2)). Evidence is taken in the respondent's presence, or his advocate's where attendance is dispensed with, and recorded as in summons-cases. If he wilfully avoids service or neglects to attend, the Magistrate may proceed ex parte; the order may be set aside for good cause on an application within three months.
6. Interim relief (second and third provisos). Interim allowance and expenses while the case is pending; decided as far as possible within sixty days of service of notice.
7. Payment and enforcement (s.144(2)-(3), s.147). From the order or, if so ordered, the application; on default, a warrant to levy the amount as a fine, then imprisonment up to one month for each month's allowance still unpaid. A levy application must be made within one year of the due date. Any Magistrate where the respondent may be can enforce the order.
8. Wife's disqualifications (s.144(4)-(5)). No allowance to a wife living in adultery, refusing without sufficient reason to live with her husband, or living separately by mutual consent; on proof of these, the Magistrate cancels an existing order.
9. Change of circumstances (s.146). The allowance may be altered on a change in circumstances or after a civil court decision; a divorced wife's order is cancelled on remarriage, on receipt of the whole sum payable on divorce under customary or personal law, or on voluntary surrender of her rights (s.146(3)).

What this means in practice

For the claimant

• File where it is easiest for you under Section 145(1). A parent may now file where he or she lives (clause (d)).
• Ask for interim maintenance and expenses at the start (second proviso); the court should aim to decide it within sixty days of notice.
• Ask that the allowance run from the date of the application (s.144(2)); Rajnesh directs this in all cases (Part B-VI(d)).
• If payments stop, apply to levy within one year of each missed payment (first proviso to s.144(3)); older arrears cannot be recovered by warrant.
• Rajnesh (Part B-VI(a)-(b)) requires the applicant to disclose earlier maintenance proceedings and orders, and both parties to file the Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities in the format annexed to that judgment.

For the respondent

• The Magistrate fixes the rate; there is no statutory ceiling. Deepa Joshi (paras 13, 15-16) holds that loan repayments that build assets are voluntary commitments that cannot be permitted to substantially dilute the earning capacity used to fix maintenance.
• An offer to maintain the wife on condition that she lives with you can be overridden if the Magistrate finds just ground for her refusal (second proviso to s.144(3)). Rina Kumari (para 29) holds that a restitution decree and her non-compliance do not by themselves disqualify her under Section 125(4).
• A change in circumstances is raised under Section 146(1), not by stopping payment.

For the advocate

• The dropped word "minor" is a live drafting point: clause (b) no longer states an age limit, while the first proviso still refers to majority and clause (c) still covers adult children only in cases of abnormality or injury. How clause (b) reads for an adult able-bodied child is unresolved in the judgments read.

Judgments that still matter

Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, [1985] 3 S.C.R. 844 (1985 INSC 97) — 23 April 1985. A Bench of five Judges (judgment delivered by Y.V. Chandrachud C.J.) held that clause (b) of the Explanation to Section 125(1), defining "wife" to include a divorced wife, "contains no words of limitation to justify the exclusion of 'Muslim women from its scope", and that "Section 125 is truly secular in character". It held that Mahr is not a sum payable "on divorce" within Section 127(3)(b). The appeal was dismissed. The report shows no paragraph numbers. Section 144 and Section 146(3)(b) BNSS repeat the words construed.

Rajnesh v. Neha, [2020] 13 S.C.R. 1093 (2020 INSC 631) — 4 November 2020. In a judgment by Indu Malhotra J. (with R. Subhash Reddy J.), the Court issued directions under Article 142 for all maintenance proceedings (Part B-VI, Final Directions). Where successive claims are made under different statutes, the court considers adjustment or set-off, and the applicant must disclose previous proceedings (direction (a)); both parties file an Affidavit of Disclosure of Assets and Liabilities (direction (b)); maintenance "in all cases will be awarded from the date of filing the application" (direction (d)); and orders may be enforced under Section 128 CrPC or as a money decree (direction (e)). The judgment uses Part headings rather than paragraph numbers.

Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana, [2024] 7 S.C.R. 1236 (2024 INSC 506) — 10 July 2024. B.V. Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih JJ. delivered separate concurring judgments and a joint order. Section 125 CrPC "applies to all married women including Muslim married women"; a Muslim woman married and divorced under Muslim law may seek maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, the 1986 Act, or both, because the 1986 Act "is not in derogation of Section 125 of the CrPC but in addition to the said provision" (Order, conclusions (a)-(c); Masih J., para 37; Nagarathna J., para 30). The case applied the CrPC; Section 144 repeats the words construed.

Rina Kumari v. Dinesh Kumar Mahto, [2025] 1 S.C.R. 462 (2025 INSC 55) — 10 January 2025. In a judgment by Sanjay Kumar J. (with Sanjiv Khanna C.J.I.), the Court held that a restitution decree obtained by the husband and the wife's non-compliance "would not, by itself, be sufficient to attract the disqualification under Section 125(4)"; whether she had valid and sufficient reason to refuse depends on the evidence (para 29). The Family Court's order was restored (para 39). The disqualification words are repeated in Section 144(4) BNSS.

Deepa Joshi v. Gaurav Joshi, 2026 INSC 370 — 16 April 2026 (non-reportable). Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih JJ. decided an appeal from an application filed "under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita" on 18 September 2024 (para 5). They held that loan repayments that create assets "cannot be placed on the same footing as necessary expenditure", because the liability to maintain a spouse "is a primary obligation" (para 13), and raised the monthly allowance to Rs. 25,000 (paras 16-17).

Which law applies to your case

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that an application pending immediately before the BNSS came into force is disposed of under the CrPC "as if this Sanhita had not come into force"; on a reading of that clause, a Section 125 application pending on 1 July 2024 continues under the CrPC. Section 531(2)(b) deems orders made under the CrPC and in force on that date to have been made under the corresponding BNSS provisions, so, on a reading, an existing maintenance order is altered under Section 146 and enforced under Sections 144(3) and 147. A fresh application from 1 July 2024 is made under Section 144 even if the neglect began earlier. For the general rule, see which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What is the BNSS equivalent of Section 125 CrPC? Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 replaces Section 125 CrPC, and Sections 145, 146 and 147 BNSS replace Sections 126, 127 and 128. A Magistrate of the first class may order a person with sufficient means who neglects or refuses to maintain his wife, child, father or mother to pay a monthly allowance at such rate as the Magistrate thinks fit.

Can an adult child claim maintenance under Section 144 BNSS? Section 144(1)(c) BNSS, like Section 125(1)(c) CrPC, covers a child who has attained majority (not a married daughter) who cannot maintain itself because of physical or mental abnormality or injury. Section 144(1)(b) now reads "legitimate or illegitimate child" without the word "minor", and the definition of "minor" is dropped. Whether that widens clause (b) to other adult children is a question of reading; no Supreme Court judgment read for this page decides it.

Can I get interim maintenance while the case is pending? Yes. The second proviso to Section 144(1) BNSS lets the Magistrate order a monthly allowance for interim maintenance and the expenses of the proceeding while the application is pending. The third proviso says such an application shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within sixty days of service of notice. Both provisos were in Section 125(1) CrPC since Act 50 of 2001.

From which date is maintenance payable? Section 144(2) BNSS, like Section 125(2) CrPC, makes the allowance payable from the date of the order or, if so ordered, from the date of the application. In Rajnesh v. Neha ([2020] 13 S.C.R. 1093, Part B-VI(d)) the Supreme Court directed, under Article 142, that maintenance in all cases be awarded from the date of filing the application.

Where can a parent file for maintenance under the BNSS? Section 145(1) BNSS allows proceedings in any district where the respondent is, where he or his wife resides, where he last resided with his wife or the mother of an illegitimate child, and, newly, under clause (d), where his father or mother resides. Section 126(1) CrPC had only the first three.

What happens if the person ordered to pay does not pay? Under Section 144(3) BNSS the Magistrate may issue a warrant to levy the amount as a fine is levied and may sentence the defaulter, for each month's allowance unpaid after the warrant, to imprisonment up to one month or until payment. The application to levy must be made within one year from the date the amount became due. Under Section 147 any Magistrate where the defaulter may be can enforce the order.

Can a divorced Muslim woman claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC or Section 144 BNSS? Under Section 125 CrPC, yes. In Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana (2024 INSC 506) the Supreme Court held that a Muslim woman married and divorced under Muslim law may use Section 125 CrPC, the 1986 Act, or both, the 1986 Act being in addition to Section 125. The Explanation defining "wife" to include a divorced woman who has not remarried is repeated in Section 144 BNSS, so on a reading of the text the same applies to Section 144.

Which law applies to a maintenance case filed before 1 July 2024? Section 531(2)(a) BNSS says an application pending immediately before the BNSS came into force continues under the CrPC. Section 531(2)(b) deems orders made under the CrPC and in force on that date to have been made under the corresponding BNSS provision. On a reading of those clauses, a pending Section 125 case is decided under the CrPC, and an existing order can be altered under Section 146 or enforced under Sections 144(3) and 147 BNSS.

Related

• Claiming maintenance for wife, children or parents: BNSS 144 vs CrPC 125
• Bigamy, adultery and marriage offences: BNS vs IPC 493-498
• Offences against women: IPC vs BNS
• Section 482 CrPC — inherent powers of the High Court
• Offence before 1 July 2024 — which law applies
• CrPC to BNSS master table
• Sections 106–110 CrPC vs Sections 125–129 BNSS — Security for Keeping the Peace and for Good Behaviour

Sources

• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette text): Sections 2(1)(b), (d) and (e), 144, 145, 146, 147 and 531.
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (India Code text): Sections 125 (with amendment footnotes and the Madhya Pradesh and West Bengal amendments), 126, 127 and 128.
• Judgments read in full text: Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985_3_844_868_EN.md); Rajnesh v. Neha (2020_13_1093_1174_EN.md); Mohd. Abdul Samad v. State of Telangana (2024_7_1236_1313_EN.md); Rina Kumari v. Dinesh Kumar Mahto (2025_1_462_483_EN.md); Deepa Joshi v. Gaurav Joshi (Diary_48305-2025_Judgment.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.