Maintenance - A wife living separately due to cruelty and dowry harassment is entitled to maintenance

Uttarakhand High Court Overturns Family Court's Decision, Grants Maintenance to Estranged Wife. Court Finds Wife's Separation Justifiable Due to Cruelty and Dowry Harassment, Orders Monthly Maintenance Payment

In a significant judgment, the Uttarakhand High Court has overturned a Family Court's decision denying maintenance to a wife living separately from her husband due to alleged cruelty and dowry harassment. The High Court has directed the husband, Rohit Singh, to pay a monthly maintenance of Rs.9,000 to his estranged wife, Jyoti, from the date she initially filed the application for maintenance.

The judgment, delivered by Justice Pankaj Purohit, found the Family Court's earlier rejection of Jyoti's maintenance claim unsustainable. Jyoti had been subjected to mental and physical cruelty and dowry demands shortly after her marriage to Rohit Singh in March 2019. This led to her being ousted from the matrimonial home, compelling her return to her parental house. Despite efforts for reconciliation, the situation remained unresolved, prompting Jyoti to seek legal redress.

In the Family Court, Rohit Singh contested the maintenance claim, alleging that Jyoti was suffering from concealed medical conditions such as epilepsy and depression. However, these claims were deemed unsupported by substantial evidence by the High Court. Justice Purohit noted that the allegations of concealed illness were not backed by cogent evidence, and emphasized that a legally wedded wife is entitled to maintenance unless specifically disentitled under the law.

The judgment underscored the husband's obligation to maintain his wife, especially when she lacks sufficient means to sustain herself appropriately. Rohit Singh's income, reportedly Rs.30,000 per month, was deemed adequate to fulfill this duty.

The High Court highlighted the social justice purpose of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which aims to protect women from destitution and vagrancy. It referenced several Supreme Court rulings, including Chaturbhuj v. Sita Bai and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan, to reinforce the principle that a wife living separately due to cruelty is entitled to maintenance.

The Court also addressed the Family Court's error in concluding that Jyoti was living separately without cause, citing her filed FIR against Rohit Singh and his family for dowry harassment and cruelty under various IPC sections and the Dowry Prohibition Act. A charge sheet had already been filed, establishing justifiable grounds for her separation.

The ruling mandates that the maintenance amount be deposited directly into Jyoti's bank account monthly, with arrears to be cleared within one month. Jyoti is instructed to provide her bank details to Rohit Singh to facilitate the payments.

The judgment marks a significant victory for Jyoti, emphasizing the legal protections available for women facing domestic cruelty and the importance of judicial oversight in maintenance disputes.

Bottom Line:

A legally wedded wife living separately due to cruelty and dowry harassment is entitled to maintenance, even if she has some income. Husband's obligation to maintain wife is paramount unless specifically disentitled under law.

Statutory provision(s): Section 125 Cr.P.C., Sections 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC

Jyoti v. Rohit Singh, (Uttarakhand) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2763586