Read Time: 05 minutes

Justice Bharti Dangre of the Bombay High Court has held that a father cannot deny paying maintenance to his major daughter merely because she has claimed that she is a model and earns Rs.72-80 lakhs.

The judge opined that it is the habit of the youth of today, to project a glossy picture and posting the same in the social media though its contents may not be always true.

Court held the above in a case where, a father challenged the order of maintenance on the ground that his major daughter, on her own, earns a handsome income from her modelling career. In order to substantiate this, the father placed printed copies of the photographs posted by his daughter in the social media like Instagram and her instagram biography. It was contended by the father that the daughter has claimed in her Instagram  that she earns an income of Rs.72 lakhs to Rs.80 lakhs.

The family court dismissed his plea nothing that the photographs of Instagram and her Instagram biography is not sufficient to hold that she is independent and sufficient income. The high court while concurring with the view of the family court, held that it is well known fact that it is the habit of the youth of today, to project a glossy picture and posting the same in the social media though its contents may not be always true.

The High Court has observed that it is the habit of the youth of today, to project a glossy picture and posting the same in the social media though its contents may not be always true. It has further been observed that since the father’s contention that his daughter’s earning is Rs.72 lakhs to Rs.80 lakhs is based merely on his daughter’s photographs posted on Instagram, the lower court was right in rejecting it as it lacked any evidence.

It has thus been concluded that it is the responsibility of the father to maintain his daughter, who was found to be without any source of income. Court noted that the daughter should be supported more particularly because she is pursuing a carer at Pearl Academy, which warrants huge fees. Thus in the light of the above observations, the court dismissed the father’s plea.

Case title: Anand Chandravadan Mistry Vs State of Maharashtra