Husband Can't Plead Low Income While Withholding Financial Details: Delhi High Court Upholds Maintenance

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a husband cannot evade obligation to pay maintenance by claiming a low income while withholding material details about his financial status.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma relied on Tasmeer Qureshi v. Asfia Muzaffar (2025) where it was held that an able-bodied man cannot be permitted to defeat a claim for maintenance by his wife by withholding basic financial particulars and further, that Court is entitled to draw an adverse inference and impute at least a baseline earning capacity.

The Court thus upheld an interim maintenance award of ₹13,000 per month in favour of the wife and her two minor children under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

The case arose from cross-petitions filed by both spouses challenging an appellate court order that enhanced the interim maintenance payable by the husband.

While the husband contended that the amount was excessive, the wife argued that it was inadequate given his actual financial capacity.

The Court noted that although the husband claimed to be earning ₹12,000 per month as a supervisor, the material on record indicated that he had previously run a business and had made financial investments, including mutual funds and tax-saving instruments.

It also observed discrepancies in his income disclosures, including the filing of income tax returns inconsistent with his claim of being a salaried employee.

Significantly, the Court found that despite the wife having pointed out the existence of bank accounts and financial records relating to the husband and his firm, the husband did not place on record any clear explanation regarding the status of those accounts or the circumstances in which the business activities allegedly ceased.

“No satisfactory explanation has been offered regarding the earlier accounts maintained in his name and in the name of the firm or the circumstances under which they were closed. In these circumstances, this Court finds no reason to disagree with the observations of the learned Appellate Court that the husband appears to have withheld material information regarding his actual income and financial status,” the Court said.

As such, the Court assessed the husband's income at not less than ₹20,000 per month and upheld the grant of ₹13,000 per month maintenance.

Appearance: Mr. Vikram Saini, Adv. along with respondent no. 1.

Case title: DK v. N

Case no.: CRL.M.C. 6628/2022

Click here to read order