The Supreme Court today orally expressed concern over wives writing to husband's employers during matrimonial litigation, observing that such complaints could result in loss of employment and ultimately affect maintenance.

The observations came while a bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice R Mahadevan was hearing a transfer petition filed by a woman seeking transfer of a defamation suit filed against her by her husband's friend (respondent) from Assam to Ghaziabad, UP. The wife sought transfer on the ground that she is already engaged in multiple litigations against her husband in Ghaziabad.

Justice Nagarathna observed that many wives were adopting this course of action by writing to their husband's employers, leading to termination of employment.

“This is what many wives are doing. Writing against the husband to the employer. Then they will be terminated. Getting divorce is one thing but getting them out of their livelihood is worse,” she said.

During the hearing, counsel for the wife submitted that she was already involved in multiple litigations with her husband in Ghaziabad and a defamation case had been filed against her at the instance of her husband by his close friend and colleague.

The defamation case was related to a representation made by the wife to the Air Force authorities in Delhi alleging that the husband, an Air Force officer, was running an independent business, which was not permissible under the service rules.

Responding, Justice Nagarathna remarked that it was "the worst thing" wives could do to write to their husband's employer during matrimonial disputes.

“You are not the Air Force. Why are you...? See, this is the worst thing the wives can do, write to the employer about their husband because there is matrimonial litigation. They lose their jobs. What maintenance amount can you seek afterwards?” the Judge observed.

Counsel for the wife emphasised that the representation had been made only after the husband filed a false complaint alleging theft of Air Force articles. He submitted that the husband had falsely accused the wife and her brother of stealing an Air Force helmet, and the representation to the Air Force authorities was made only to ascertain the whereabouts of the article after it had been allotted. He further submitted that the defamation case was not filed by the husband but by the husband's friend

The Court passed an order referring the matter to mediation. The order stated, “In order to explore the possibility of settlement between the parties, the matter is referred to the Supreme Court Mediation Centre.”

Justice Nagarathna also asked the counsel appearing for the wife to advise her to resolve all the disputes and withdraw the allegations.