Wife Quitting Job For Marital Obligations Entitled To Support: MP High Court Upholds ₹40K Maintenance To Engineer Wife

A bench of Justice Gajendra Singh thus UPHELD a Family Court order directing the husband to pay Rs. 40K as maintenance to wife, holding a Bachelor of Engineering degree, noting that there is a difference between the phrases “may earn” and “is earning”.

Justice Singh noted that there was no evidence that the wife is earning and the awarded amount was 'proportionate' to the standard, as the husband, who previously worked in the UK and now works as an Assistant Manager in Genpact Pvt. Ltd., an American Company.

Briefly put, the husband moved the HC with a criminal revision petition challenging the Family Court's order on the wife's plea under Section 125 CrPC.

The wife had approached the court for maintenance, alleging that she was subjected to cruelty for not fulfilling the unlawful demands of her husband.

On the other hand, the husband argued that his wife was living separately without any reasonable cause. He relied heavily on the fact that she was highly educated, with a Bachelor of Engineering degree.

It was his case that the wife was capable of maintaining herself and worked as a freelancer, earning ₹50,000, while he saved only a meagre ₹3,500 per month from his own salary. The husband also submitted that she retained all her Streedhan.

At the outset, the High Court noted that Streedhan is an absolute property of a woman and the husband can't avoid maintenance simply because the Streedhan remains with the wife.

The Court further noted though the Husband denied his package of Rs.18 lacs per annum, he failed to adduce any evidence/document regarding his salary.

On the contrary, he admitted during cross-examination to owning lodges and acknowledged that he purchased a flat for Rs. 30 lacs and received the amount from his wife's parents to purchase the said flat.

Furthermore, the Court observed that when couples enter a marriage with expectations of a high-quality life, a split within a short span is not easy for either person. 

Consequently, noting that there was no concrete evidence on record to prove the wife was actually earning, the High Court concluded that the awarded amount of ₹40,000 was entirely appropriate.

Thus, finding no perversity in the trial court's order, the High Court dismissed the revision petition.

However, the Court granted the husband liberty to approach the Family Court under Section 145 BNSS to seek modification of the maintenance order if any change of circumstances occurs, such as if the wife successfully secures a job in the future.