ISLAMABAD:
In case of dissolution of a marriage, the maintenance amount that a mother gets from her former husband for a child depends on both the nature and extent of the child’s “reasonable requirements” and the father’s financial means.
In a recent five-page verdict, the Supreme Court has set guidelines for determining the maintenance amount to be received for a child after dissolution of a marriage.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi and Justice Shakeel Ahmad heard the case with the junior judge writing the verdict. The judgement noted that maintenance traditionally includes food, raiment, and lodging. However, this list is not exhaustive.
It said given the evolving societal standards and the overarching principle of welfare of the minor, the term must be interpreted broadly to encompass all reasonable expenses necessary for the physical, mental, and emotional development of the child. “This includes, inter alia, educational costs, healthcare, and other needs consistent with the natural growth and comfort of the minor,” the verdict said.
It said the amount provided should reflect the family’s social status, ensuring that the child is not deprived of opportunities for development and wellbeing solely due to the dissolution of the marriage.
“The second consideration pertains to the father’s financial capacity to maintain the child. Under Islamic principles, the obligation of maintenance is generally subject to certain conditions.”
According to the verdict, firstly, the child must be in need. If the child possesses independent means sufficient for his/her own support, the duty of the father to provide maintenance does not arise.
“Secondly, the child must be unable to earn due to minority or incapacity. Thirdly, the father must possess the means to provide such maintenance,'” it said.
The judgement noted that while most Islamic schools of thought agree that the father’s financial ability is a necessary precondition, the Hanafi school maintains that, in the case of children, the obligation to maintain arises irrespective of actual wealth, provided the father has the capacity to earn.
It said the mere fact that the father is not working, in the absence of any serious mental or physical challenges, cannot be admitted as a valid justification for his failure to discharge the obligation of maintenance towards his children.
“In circumstances where the father lacks the means to provide maintenance and is incapable of earning due to genuine limitations, the duty to maintain the children may devolve upon the mother if she is in a position of financial ease.
“If neither parent possesses sufficient means, the obligation may extend to the paternal grandfather, subject to his financial ability to provide support to the children,” it added.
