S.94 BNSS | Husband Can Seek Wife's Employment Records To Oppose Maintenance Claim: Rajasthan High Court
Rajasthan High Court has held that a husband can seek his estranged wife's employment records under Section 94 BNSS in order to oppose her maintenance claim, reiterating Supreme Court's 2020 judgment which held that either of the parties may seek production of relevant documents from the other party. In doing so the court allowed a man's application under Section 94 BNSS before the trial...
Rajasthan High Court has held that a husband can seek his estranged wife's employment records under Section 94 BNSS in order to oppose her maintenance claim, reiterating Supreme Court's 2020 judgment which held that either of the parties may seek production of relevant documents from the other party.
In doing so the court allowed a man's application under Section 94 BNSS before the trial court seeking disclosure of wife's earnings who was stated to be working as a nurse at a Private hospital, on the ground that the same were not disclosed by her in the maintenance proceedings.
Section 94 BNSS provides that whenever any document or thing is necessary or desirable for investigation, inquiry or trial, the Court may issue directions for its production.
While setting aside the decision of trial court that had rejected the husband's application, the bench of Justice Baljinder Singh Sandhu observed that the information sought was relevant for fair adjudication, and since the concerned hospital where the wife was working was a private institution, Section 94 was clearly attracted.
"In the present case, the proceedings pertain to maintenance, and the petitioner is seeking the documents of service and income of the complainant-wife, which undoubtedly a material factor for adjudication. In this regard, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Rajnesh v. Neha (2020 INSC 631), wherein it has been categorically held that both parties are under a mandatory obligation to make full and frank disclosure of their income, assets, and liabilities in maintenance proceedings. And further any party may also seek production of relevant documents from the opposite party.
In the present case, as submitted, the petitioner made bona fide efforts to ascertain the income of the complainant; however, such information could not received. The respondent-wife has not disclosed any fact about her service. The petitioner has specifically alleged that she is working in Vyas Medicity. Hence, in such circumstances, the petitioner sought the intervention of the learned trial court for summoning of all relevant records from Vyas Medicity. When nothing was provided by the hospital, certainly the petitioner had no option but to seek such information through the Court by filing an application under Section 94 BNSS. Since the hospital in question is a private institution and has declined to furnish information, the provisions of Section 94 BNSS are clearly attracted"
The court observed that the documents sought by the husband were "relevant", had "direct bearing on the fair adjudication" and were "certainly necessary and desirable" for the purpose of trial.
The wife had filed an application for maintenance from her husband. During the course of proceedings, the petitioner husband found that the wife was working as a nurse at a private hospital and was earning Rs. 80,000 monthly. However, this fact was not disclosed by the wife before the Trial Court.
The petitioner visited the hospital and sought information about the wife's employment which was refused by the hospital without his wife's consent. Hence, at the stage of final argument, an application under Section 94 BNSS was filed by the petitioner seeking such information which was rejected on the ground that the burden was upon the husband to produce the documents.
Against this the husband moved the high court contending that he had no other means to obtain such information. If the documents were already in his possession, there was no need for him to file the application.
After hearing the contentions, the Court opined that since the proceedings pertained to maintenance, documents of wife's income were undoubtedly material factor for adjudication.
Accordingly, the petition was allowed, and the trial court was directed to seek necessary information from the concerned hospital.
Title: Arvind Kumar v Smt. Namita
Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 142