Justice H.P. Sandesh rejected the contention that the daughter’s majority status, by itself, extinguished the father’s obligation to meet her educational expenses. He pointed out that in today's competitive world, an MBBS degree alone isn't enough—a postgraduate specialisation is practically essential for a solid medical career. After examining the father's bank transactions and asset holdings, the Court found that he clearly had the financial capacity and couldn't just walk away from his fundamental obligation.
The Court interpreted Section 20 of the DV Act by examining the overarching purpose of the legislation and the broader concept of "economic abuse," which includes the deprivation of financial resources to which an aggrieved person is entitled under law or custom. The Act gives courts broad powers to order "monetary relief" to prevent such economic abuse—ensuring children receive proper support for higher education so they can truly stand on their own feet.
So, let’s keep in mind: DV Act protections are not limited to wives or minor children. If an unmarried daughter is pursuing higher education, is not financially independent, and her father has the financial means, he is legally obligated to support her.
Case
Citation:
Petitioner
v. Respondent,
Criminal Revision Petition No. 870 of 2026 (High Court of Karnataka at
Bengaluru, Order dated July 17, 2026).
Comments
Post a Comment