Husband is obliged to give maintenance/alimony fixed by court to the wife, even if the man does not earn a single penny. Yes, this is what Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled in several cases, completely overlooking the facts in respective cases.
Justice JP Gupta, while commenting in one such case, said that if the husband is physically competent, then it is his obligation to provide sufficient maintenance to his wife and minor children even if he is not earning even a single penny. The husband will have to make every effort to raise the amount of maintenance.
If the husband is living separately due to family dispute or harassment by wife, it does not spare him from taking onus of the well-being of his wife and minor children.
ALSO READ –
In many cases, harassed husbands who have been asked to cough up sums to fully abled wives, had approached the state High Court. However, the reduction in maintenance has been rejected by court…….because perhaps our judiciary believes that come what may, man is the provider for a woman. A tight slap to Gender Equality Warriors!
- Har Prasad Sahu of Bhopal was fed up with daily harassment from his wife and decided to live separately after 12 years of marriage
- Wife then filed a case for maintenance in the family court in April 2017
- The court then instructed Sahu to pay Rs 7,000 per month as maintenance to his wife every month
- Sahu appealed to the High Court seeking the reduction of the amount, which was rejected
- A case of maintenance was filed by wife of Arvind Yadav – resident of Budhni, Sehore
- In December 2017, the family court ordered Arvind to pay Rs 2500 as compensation to the wife and Rs 1500 to the child every month
- Arvind appealed in the High Court pleading that his total income was only Rs 4,000 per month, and thus the amount of maintenance should be reduced
- The High Court had dismissed his appeal as well
Justice Vishnu Pratap Singh Chauhan of the High Court has said that even if the husband is not able to produce proof of his source of income, but has sufficient income, he is bound to pay up the amount of maintenance fixed by the court to his estranged wife.
ALSO READ –
- Using another absurd logic, the High Court stated stated that the applicant husband has not anywhere proved that he is physically or mentally incapable of earning money
- The applicant claims that he is earning wages and this means he can surely work well to provide for his family
- On the other hand, if the husband argues that his wife too is earning, it clearly shows how husband wants to avoid his responsibility of taking care of his wife
- Khandwa resident Pankaj Jadhav’s wife applied for maintenance in the Family Court
- In December 2018, the court ordered the husband to Rs 4,000 per month to his wife
- Pankaj filed an appeal by the High Court, arguing that his monthly income was only Rs 2,500-3,000 per month
- He also claimed that his wife was herself running a beauty parlour from which she earned Rs 5,000 per month
- The High Court dismissed the appeal and stayed the lower court order
The Supreme Court in 2015 issued a guideline regarding maintenance allowance in the case of Shamima Farooqui against Shahid Khan, stating that livelihood does not just mean survival. The Supreme Court ordered that the amount of maintenance should be fixed in a way that a wife can continue to live her life the way she would in her husband’s home.
- At the outset, our judicial system is extremely flawed, because against one judgement, you will come across several counter judgements by various courts
- This is because the quantum, timelines and analysis of why a woman should be awarded maintenance/alimony solely rests on the understanding of the judges
- Thus such highly subjective orders cannot become the basis of absolute justice
- Why is monthly maintenance awarded even before looking at the facts of any case?
- This is nothing but a huge extortion tool handed over to wives which encourages them to demand money even if they are guilty and in the wrong
- Once the maintenance is fixed, women often stop coming to courts for arguments on main divorce petitions, because there is no timeline to end such cases
- When Supreme Court says “women must enjoy same status as she would in her husband’s home”, there are no timelines taken into factor whatsoever
- So if a couple had a particular lifestyle in the year 2001 and the case has been dragged until 2019, why should a separated wife be awarded maintenance on current income?
- It is like awarding them a lifetime tax free allowance which they effectively use to keep dragging and filing additional cases back on the husband himself
- On one hand, society and judiciary talks of gender justice and on other side, they still want to make only the man as sole provider of a home (even if the wife is earning)
- Child maintenance must be a separate issue and both parents have to be equally responsible in raising the child
- Until this system of easy money to separated wives is not curtailed, men will be the only sufferers – whether they stay with the woman or stay away from her due to her harassment
And if you are not already shocked by our highly biased system, read the case below where a disabled man was ordered by court to pay alimony to his wife who allegedly made his life miserable. The only option Shiv had was to crowdfund his alimony to get rid of the life long problem.