Using fundamental right in maintenance case

if the things are to be considered with your view point then there will be no witness in any case.

primarily the said provision is regarding criminal liability and the purpose of including this provision is to ensure that a person is not forced to accept his guilt without a fair trial.

as far as ur case is concerned, the perusal of documents by the court is must and the Article 20 does not come to your rescue.

if you are denying your income or claim of the opposite party by way of a contrary submission then certainly the burden is upon you as well to prove to the contrary.

making it to be a constitutional issue will not help you out.

Dear Querist,

Such arguments are misconcieved and bound to fail. Because S.106 - categorically provides that burden to prove a fact which lies in specific knowledge of a person, is on that person only. Hence since you are under a better position to disclose your salary the court can very well put the burden on you as to the quantum of salary. If you fail to come out with your salary slips - the court may draw an adverse inference against you - and may presume that 'what you conceal' must be something that goes against you. Hence it's better to come out clean and contest wife's maintenance plea on other grounds such as her withdrawing w/o sufficient cause etc. 

As regards Art.20(3) - It is also bound to fail as 

i) You are not an accused - 125 is quasi civil proceedings essentially civil in nature;

ii) It is not something that is in your personal knowledge - i.e it is not testmonial - furthermore - the information is not such as would incriminate you. 

Feel free to talk !@

mr deep the points you raised have weightage.

mr chugh's reply also having weightage. more discussion on the matter required.

Reply of Advocate Chugh appears perfect when he says the following:

As regards Art.20(3) - It is also bound to fail as 

i) You are not an accused - 125 is quasi civil proceedings essentially civil in nature;

ii) It is not something that is in your personal knowledge - i.e it is not testmonial - furthermore - the information is not such as would incriminate you.

read alonwith this Supreme Court judgment: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1626264/

Hi Deep,

Article 20 (3) doest not implicate for the civil liability AND it is provisioned for the criminal liablity. You can not take the help of constitution for not disclosing the salary. it is your salary; so onus is on you to show and prove it; no other can do except your employer. Go ahead and disclose it...

Thanks!

Hi,

If court ask you to submit the details you are bound to submit it and in CrPC-125 case you are suppose to disclose the detaisl even without court order considering that the CrPC-125 case requires the parties shall prove their capacity to maintain by the partie (wife and husband).

If court specifically ask for disclosure something which the party has not...then simply say that party does not have such things....

Adv Bharat Chugh is absolutely right.