Wheels of justice cannot run on concealed income: Punjab and Haryana High Court warns litigants, upholds maintenance to wife and child
Bench asserted that honesty and transparency were essential in proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, meant to provide timely relief
Sending a clear message to litigants, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that parties involved in a maintenance case must fully disclose income and bank details as hiding facts can weaken their case. The court noted that judges largely relied on what both sides place on record, and any attempt to conceal or misrepresent financial information could prevent the court from reaching the truth and doing justice.
The court further reminded litigants that they were not passive parties but active drivers of the justice process. The Bench asserted that honesty and transparency were essential in proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, meant to provide timely relief. Any effort to mislead the court could backfire and attract judicial disapproval.
“In marital disputes, the full disclosure of the income and the bank details by both the parties is a pertinent factor to ensure fair and just decision. In proceedings arising out of maintenance petitions, the Courts plays heavy reliance on the facts and material so provided by the rival parties and hence utmost transparency and credibility of information is expected from them,” Justice Neerja K. Kalson asserted.
The Bench added proper and accurate disclosure of relevant facts by the rival parties promoted equity and ensured just outcome of the judicial process. However, any attempt to obscure, misrepresent, conceal financial standing or other relevant facts gravely undermined the judicial goal of reaching to the truth and doing justice between the parties.
“While it is an inherent duty of the Court to uncover the truth and render justice between the parties, it is equally incumbent upon litigants to approach the Court with utmost candor and transparency. The doctrine of “he who seeks equity must do equity”, rooted in equitable jurisprudence, applies with unmitigated force to all Courts and judicial forums. This maxim underscores the foundational principle that parties seeking relief must demonstrate fairness and good faith in their conduct,” Justice Kalson added.
The Bench made it clear that the litigants were indispensable participants in the administration of justice “akin to wheels of the chariot of justice”. Their conduct significantly impacted the Court’s ability to deliver equitable and efficient resolutions. This obligation assumed particular importance in maintenance proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where financial disclosures and factual veracity were pivotal to ensuring a just outcome for the parties involved.
“Maintenance proceedings, being remedial and benevolent in nature, demand utmost transparency to uphold the spirit of justice. Any attempt to frustrate these proceedings through concealment or deceit undermines the sanctity of judicial processes and must be met with appropriate judicial disapproval to preserve the integrity of justice delivery,” the Bench observed.
The ruling came on a revision petition challenging the order dated July 23, 2024, passed by the Family Court at Jhajjar, granting interim monthly maintenance of Rs 5,000 to the wife and Rs 3,000 to the minor daughter from the date of application.
“The quantum of interim maintenance so determined by the Family Court does not call for any interference,” the Bench observed, while directing the husband to pay one-time litigation expenses of Rs 10,000.
Why it matters
The judgment sends a clear signal—concealment of income is not just a litigation tactic, but a direct assault on justice itself, and courts will not permit the “wheels of the chariot” to be slowed by lack of candour.
