A recurring question in Delhi's family courts: the son has turned eighteen but is still in college, or the daughter is a major but unmarried and unemployed — can they still claim maintenance from their father? The answer depends on which statute is invoked. The summary jurisdiction under Section 144 of the BNSS (formerly Section 125 CrPC) draws a hard line at majority; Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 draws a different one. The Supreme Court mapped the boundary in Abhilasha v. Parkash (15 September 2020), and the distinction decides where such claims must be filed.
Two statutes, two different lines
Maintenance for children lives in parallel regimes that are often confused. The criminal-procedure remedy — Section 125 CrPC, now Section 144 BNSS — is a quick, secular, summary jurisdiction designed to prevent destitution. Personal law — for Hindus, the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA), and for proceedings between spouses, Sections 24–26 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — creates fuller substantive rights enforced through civil proceedings. The age of the child matters differently in each.
| Claimant | Section 144 BNSS (125 CrPC) | Hindu law |
|---|---|---|
| Minor child (legitimate or illegitimate) | Maintainable against a parent with sufficient means | Maintainable — Section 20 HAMA; Section 26 HMA in matrimonial proceedings |
| Major child, able-bodied | Not maintainable | Son: generally no; daughter: see below |
| Major child with physical or mental abnormality or injury | Maintainable — Section 144(1)(c) | Maintainable |
| Unmarried major daughter unable to maintain herself | Not maintainable (absent abnormality or injury) | Maintainable until marriage — Section 20(3) HAMA, including reasonable marriage expenses |
What Abhilasha decided
In Abhilasha v. Parkash, an unmarried major daughter pressed her claim before the Magistrate under Section 125 CrPC. A three-Judge Bench held that the Magistrate’s jurisdiction ends at majority unless the physical-or-mental-abnormality clause applies; the daughter’s remedy lay under Section 20(3) HAMA, a distinct and larger statutory right, to be pursued before the civil forum — with the useful observation that a Family Court can administer both. The appeal failed, but with liberty to sue under the 1956 Act.
She is unmarried and has no income, so the Magistrate who awarded her maintenance as a minor can simply continue it.
At majority the summary remedy lapses for the able-bodied. The continuing right exists — but under Section 20(3) HAMA, pleaded and proved as a civil claim, ordinarily in the Family Court.
Pleading the Section 20(3) claim well
Strategy notes for Delhi matters
Where a mother is already litigating under Section 144 BNSS or the DV Act, a major daughter’s claim should not be tacked on to the Magistrate’s proceeding; it belongs in the Family Court under HAMA, and filing it correctly the first time avoids a limitation of years lost to the wrong forum. Conversely, fathers responding to Magistrate-court claims by major children can take the maintainability objection at the threshold — though they should expect the claim to return, properly framed, on the civil side. And in divorce proceedings, children’s educational needs are routinely provided for under Section 26 HMA irrespective of these boundaries, so the practical answer for a child in the middle of a parental dispute often lies inside the matrimonial case itself.
These rules apply to Hindus; children governed by other personal laws look to their own regimes alongside the secular Section 144 BNSS. Every case ultimately turns on proof of need and of means — the forums differ, the enquiry does not.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a major child claim maintenance under Section 144 BNSS?
Only on proof of a physical or mental abnormality or injury making the child unable to maintain itself — Section 144(1)(c) BNSS, mirroring Section 125(1)(c) CrPC. An able-bodied major child, son or daughter, falls outside the Magistrate's summary jurisdiction, as the Supreme Court held in Abhilasha v. Parkash.
What is the unmarried daughter's separate right under Hindu law?
Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 obliges a Hindu parent to maintain an unmarried daughter who cannot maintain herself out of her own earnings or property — a right that continues until her marriage and includes reasonable marriage expenses. It is enforced by a civil claim, not before a Magistrate under Section 144 BNSS.
Which forum should an unmarried major daughter approach?
A Family Court. In Abhilasha the Supreme Court noted that Family Courts can exercise jurisdiction over both regimes, and it dismissed the Section 125 CrPC claim while expressly reserving liberty to sue under Section 20(3) HAMA on proof of inability to self-maintain.
Do education expenses of children figure in matrimonial maintenance?
Yes. In proceedings between spouses, the reasonable needs of dependent children — schooling, tuition and allied costs — are a standard component of the maintenance assessment, and interim maintenance frequently carries a component for a child's education while custody and divorce proceedings continue.