Distinction in marital status not a factor in seeking maintenance under the DV Act, affirmates Delhi High Court.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has reaffirmed the statutory right of a wife to claim maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act, regardless of whether it is her first or subsequent marriage.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma is dealing with a man's plea against the grant of ₹1 lakh monthly maintenance to his wife. The husband, who is challenging the maintenance awarded by a sessions court, was found to be trying to sell off property during the case to avoid his financial responsibilities, and the Court prohibited him from disposing of his assets without court approval.
The husband, who maintains a high standard of living, with monthly expenses of ₹31,000 on driver and fuel, ₹10,000 on entertainment, and ₹4,000 on domestic help, argued that his income is lower than estimated, while the wife is overstating her expenses. However, the Court found that the husband is leading a comfortable lifestyle and has the financial capacity to bear the awarded maintenance.
The husband's argument that he had accepted the wife along with her two sons from her previous marriage was deemed misconceived by the Court. The Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act does not distinguish between a wife's first or subsequent marriage for the purpose of maintenance.
The income affidavit filed by the respondent wife reveals a meagre income of ₹12,000 per month. The Court rejected the husband's argument that his wife was capable of earning, stating that the wife's capability to earn is a relevant factor, but it must be demonstrated that she is gainfully employed or receiving sufficient income to support herself. If not, the husband's obligations remain.
While the husband suffers from Ankylosing Spondylitis, a chronic illness requiring expensive treatment, he claimed to spend ₹1.56 lakh per month on treatment for his condition but failed to provide supporting medical documents or bills. The Court declined maintenance to the major sons of the respondent wife as they are not legally entitled to it in the absence of any material indicating continued dependency.
Advocate Sumit Rana appeared for the wife, while Advocates Bimlesh Kumar, Sushil Kumar Singh, and Monika Gupta appeared for the husband. The Court emphasized that once a husband voluntarily enters into a marriage and accepts his wife and her children from any previous marriages, he cannot use those circumstances as a defense to evade his legal responsibilities.
The Court's ruling underscores the importance of financial support for women in marriages, whether first or subsequent, and emphasizes the husband's legal obligations to provide for his wife's maintenance. The case serves as a reminder that the Domestic Violence Act is a powerful tool for ensuring the financial security of women in India.
- Despite the husband's arguments about his financial situation and the wife's expenses, the Court reaffirmed that education and self-development, including personal growth, should not be neglected due to financial constraints, as it is crucial for the general news of women's empowerment and the crime-and-justice landscape in politics.
- While the husband's ongoing legal battle focuses on maintenance, the ruling by the Delhi High Court extends beyond his case, setting a significant precedent for the importance of financial security in education-and-self-development and personal growth, highlighting the intersection between politics and general news, as well as the ongoing fight against crime and justice, particularly for women's rights.
