Maintenance is usually litigated as a wife's claim, and most of the statutory architecture is built that way: Section 144 BNSS, the DV Act and Section 18 HAMA all protect the wife alone. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is the exception. Sections 24 and 25 are deliberately gender-neutral: either spouse may seek maintenance pendente lite, litigation expenses and permanent alimony from the other. This explainer sets out where a husband's claim is maintainable, where it is not, and how courts actually treat such claims.
The statutory map
Whether a husband can claim maintenance depends entirely on which statute governs. The table shows the field:
| Provision | Who may claim | Husband eligible? |
|---|---|---|
| Section 24 HMA — pendente lite | "the wife or the husband" | Yes |
| Section 25 HMA — permanent alimony | "the wife or the husband" | Yes |
| Section 144 BNSS (old S. 125 CrPC) | Wife, children, parents | No |
| DV Act, 2005 — S. 20 monetary relief | Aggrieved woman | No |
| Section 18 HAMA | Hindu wife | No |
| Sections 36–37 Special Marriage Act | Wife | No |
The husband's window is therefore narrow: a matrimonial proceeding under the Hindu Marriage Act — divorce, judicial separation, restitution, annulment — within which Section 24 operates, and the decree stage at which Section 25 can be invoked.
What Section 24 requires
Section 24 permits either spouse to seek maintenance pendente lite and the expenses of the proceeding where it appears that he or she has no independent income sufficient for support and the necessary expenses. Three features deserve attention. First, the test is the absence of sufficient independent income, not bare unemployment. Second, the order is tied to the pendency of the matrimonial proceeding — it begins with it and ends with it. Third, the proviso added in 2001 directs that such applications be disposed of, as far as possible, within sixty days of service of notice.
How courts treat a husband's claim
Although the text is even-handed, the jurisprudence is demanding. Courts start from the social reality that an able-bodied man capable of earning is expected to earn — matrimonial litigation is not a substitute for employment. A husband who claims support must therefore demonstrate incapacity in a real sense: chronic illness, disability, age, or some comparable circumstance that prevents him from maintaining himself. Claims by qualified, healthy husbands who have simply stopped working — sometimes, courts suspect, to build a maintenance case or to defeat the wife's own claim — are viewed with scepticism and usually fail.
Where the claim is genuine, however, the provision is applied according to its terms. Litigation expenses in particular are granted more readily than monthly support, because access to representation in the matrimonial case is a facet of a fair hearing for both spouses.
Permanent alimony under Section 25
Section 25 empowers the court, at the time of passing any decree or at any time thereafter, to order that the respondent pay the applicant — wife or husband — a gross sum or periodical payments for maintenance and support, having regard to the parties' income and property, their conduct, and the circumstances of the case. The order is variable under Section 25(2) on a change of circumstances, and can be rescinded under Section 25(3), including where the recipient remarries. A husband who obtained alimony and then remarries is exposed to rescission in exactly the same way as a wife.
Points of practice
- A husband's Section 24 application must be supported by the same affidavit-of-assets discipline that applies to wives' claims in Delhi — full disclosure of income, assets and liabilities.
- Plead incapacity with particulars and documents: medical records, proof of job loss beyond his control, or other concrete material.
- The wife's means matter too — the court balances both sides' incomes; the claim fails if her income is itself insufficient to support two households.
- Interim claims die with the main petition: if the matrimonial case is withdrawn or dismissed, Section 24 support ends, and only Section 25 relief can outlive the decree.
Note: This article states the position under the Hindu Marriage Act as applied in Delhi courts. It is general information, not legal advice.
Frequently Asked Questions
Under which provisions can a husband claim maintenance?
Only under the Hindu Marriage Act — Section 24 for maintenance pendente lite and litigation expenses during a matrimonial case, and Section 25 for permanent alimony at or after the decree. Both provisions expressly cover "the wife or the husband". Comparable claims by a husband are not maintainable under Section 144 BNSS, the DV Act or Section 18 HAMA, which protect the wife alone.
Is it enough that the wife earns more than the husband?
No. A mere income disparity does not entitle an able-bodied husband to maintenance. Courts expect him to show that he has no sufficient independent income and that he is genuinely unable to support himself — for instance due to illness, disability or another incapacitating circumstance — and they scrutinise claims that look like an attempt to live off the wife's earnings.
Can a husband get litigation expenses even if he is refused monthly maintenance?
Yes. Section 24 covers both the expenses of the proceeding and monthly support, and the two are separable. A court may fund a genuinely indigent husband's defence of a matrimonial case while declining monthly maintenance, or vice versa, depending on the evidence of means on both sides.
Does a husband's claim survive under the Special Marriage Act?
No. Sections 36 and 37 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 confer maintenance and alimony rights on the wife alone. A husband married under that Act cannot claim maintenance under it; the gender-neutral route exists only for marriages governed by the Hindu Marriage Act.