The institution of alimony in India has historically evolved as a gender-protective mechanism premised on the economic dependency of wives within a patriarchal marital framework. However, rapid socio-economic transformation, increasing female workforce participation, and constitutional commitments to substantive equality have prompted a reconsideration of traditional maintenance jurisprudence. This paper examines the need for alimony reform in the era of gender neutrality and financial equity, analysing whether contemporary judicial trends adequately reflect changing marital dynamics. While provisions such as Sections 24 and 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act adopt gender-neutral language by permitting “either spouse” to claim maintenance, other statutory frameworks, including Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, remain textually wife-centric. Judicial pronouncements, particularly Rajnesh v. Neha3, have introduced structured financial disclosure and emphasised income disparity, lifestyle parity, and economic vulnerability rather than gender stereotypes. Despite this progressive shift, significant inconsistencies persist due to broad judicial discretion, absence of uniform calculation guidelines, and the continuing tension between protective discrimination under Article 15(3) and equality principles under Article 14 of the Constitution. This paper argues that meaningful alimony reform must move beyond formal neutrality toward a principled, income-based framework grounded in financial equity, transparency, and uniform standards. By critically analysing statutory provisions, judicial reasoning, and comparative models, the study seeks to evaluate whether Indian alimony law is transitioning from a gender- presumptive welfare model to an equitable redistributive mechanism. It concludes by proposing doctrinal and legislative reforms to ensure fairness, predictability, and constitutional coherence in maintenance adjudication.