Bar Council of India Notice

Disclaimer & Confirmation

As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, an advocate is not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking “I Agree” below, you acknowledge and confirm that:

you are seeking information about Advocate Manish Jha of your own accord and for your own information and use; there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any kind whatsoever from Advocate Manish Jha or the chamber to solicit any work through this website; the information made available here is provided only on your specific request; and no information on this website is to be construed as legal advice, nor does its use create any advocate-client relationship.

⚖  E-397, 4th Floor, Tagore Garden Extension, New Delhi – 110027 Mon–Sat  ·  +91 98738 50301  ·  legal@advocatemanishjha.com
Advocate Manish Jha Criminal · Civil · Family Law — New Delhi ☎  Consult the Chamber
Home › In-Laws' Asset Affidavits
Delhi District Courts · 7 September 2026

Whose Wallet Is on Trial? Asset Affidavits from In-Laws in DV Maintenance Cases

A Karkardooma appellate court draws the line: financial disclosure in maintenance proceedings is primarily the spouses' burden, and relatives can be probed only on solid grounds.

Affidavits of income, assets and liabilities have become the backbone of maintenance adjudication. But can a court direct the respondent's mother — herself a party to the DV complaint — to lay her entire financial life on the record? In Santosh Mahajan v. Shachi Mahajan, decided on 7 September 2026, the Principal District & Sessions Judge, East District, Karkardooma Courts, held that it cannot be done as a matter of routine. Inquiries into the finances of relatives are permissible only in exceptional circumstances and on solid grounds — and there are better ways to trace a husband's concealed income.

The background

In a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, the wife alleged that her husband — managing director of a family company — was concealing his true income and diverting company funds. The trial court, evidently persuaded that the family\'s finances were intertwined, directed the husband\'s mother to file her own affidavit of income and assets. The mother appealed under Section 29.

What the appellate court held

The appeal was allowed in part. The directions requiring the mother-in-law to disclose her complete financial position were set aside. The court\'s reasoning proceeded on a clear principle: the power to make inquiries from relatives about their personal finances exists, but it should be exercised only in exceptional circumstances and only on the basis of solid grounds — not on suspicion or as a fishing expedition.

The obligation is the spouse\'s. Maintenance under the DV Act enforces the respondent husband\'s obligation. His mother\'s personal wealth is not the measure of the wife\'s entitlement, and her privacy is not forfeited merely because she is arrayed as a respondent.
Go to the source instead. Where the allegation is that income is parked in a company, the correct course is to summon the company\'s records directly — the accounts and filings of the entity where the husband is managing director — rather than compel relatives to open their books.
Exceptional, not routine. The door is not closed forever: where solid material shows a relative is the actual conduit of the husband\'s funds, a focused inquiry can follow. What is impermissible is the blanket, first-instance direction.

Why this matters in Delhi maintenance practice

Since Rajnesh v. Neha, the affidavit of assets has been the central document in every maintenance and interim maintenance determination. A pattern has emerged in contested cases: applicants, confronted with self-employed or family-business respondents who plead poverty, seek disclosure from the entire household. Trial courts, anxious not to let concealment succeed, sometimes grant such requests liberally. This decision recalibrates that practice. It protects the legitimate privacy of relatives while preserving every effective tool against a concealing spouse — third-party summonses to companies and banks, cross-examination on the affidavit, and adverse inferences.

Step 1: Spouses exchange Rajnesh-compliant affidavits of income, assets and liabilities.
Step 2: Discrepancies are put in issue — lifestyle, bank entries, business role versus declared income.
Step 3: The court summons records from the employer, company or bank concerned, under its power to call for documents.
Step 4: Only if solid grounds emerge that a relative holds or channels the spouse\'s funds does a targeted inquiry against that relative become proportionate.

For applicants, the practical lesson is to build the "solid grounds" first: pleadings that identify the company, the role, the specific transactions and the flow of funds will support third-party summonses — and, in a proper case, even a relative-directed inquiry. A bare assertion that "the family is wealthy" supports neither.

Takeaways

Financial disclosure in maintenance cases is spouse-centric; relatives\' affidavits are the exception, not the rule.

Company and bank records are summoned from the company and the bank — the cleaner and legally safer route to concealed income.

Relatives aggrieved by disclosure directions have an effective appellate remedy under Section 29 DV Act.

Nothing in the decision dilutes the husband\'s own disclosure obligations — his affidavit, and the consequences of falsity in it, remain fully in play.

The decision balances the fight against income concealment with the privacy of family members who happen to be parties. This article is general information on Delhi practice and is not legal advice on any individual case.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can in-laws be made parties to a DV Act complaint?

Yes. "Respondent" under Section 2(q) of the DV Act includes adult relatives of the husband, and complaints naming mothers-in-law and other family members are common. Being a party, however, does not automatically expose a relative to every direction that could be issued against the husband, particularly directions about personal finances.

Who must file the affidavit of assets in a maintenance case?

Primarily the two spouses. Following Rajnesh v. Neha, both the applicant and the respondent spouse file detailed affidavits of income, assets and liabilities. Extending that obligation to other relatives is exceptional, because the maintenance obligation being enforced is that of the spouse, not of the wider family.

What if the husband hides his income behind a family business?

The court is not helpless. It can summon the company's records directly — accounts, filings and salary registers — from the entity itself, examine bank statements, and draw adverse inferences against a non-disclosing spouse. What this decision discourages is short-circuiting that exercise by forcing relatives to disclose their personal wealth.

Is an order directing a relative to file an asset affidavit appealable?

Orders of the Magistrate in DV proceedings are appealable to the Court of Session under Section 29 of the DV Act, and that is precisely the route successfully taken in this case.

Note: This article is general information about the law and is not legal advice. It does not create an advocate-client relationship. The position stated is as at 8 September 2026 and may have changed since. Readers should verify any provision or decision referred to against the official text and seek advice on their own circumstances.