'Woman Cannot Be Forced To Live In Hostile Matrimonial Environment At Cost Of Her Dignity': Bombay HC

Mumbai, May 28: Observing that a woman cannot be expected to continue living in a hostile matrimonial environment at the cost of her dignity, the Bombay High Court has ruled that cruelty or ill-treatment in the husband’s home can itself justify a wife’s decision to live separately and still claim maintenance, even if the husband is not personally responsible for every act of harassment.

Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke of the Nagpur Bench dismissed a revision application filed by a husband challenging a Family Court order directing him to pay maintenance to his wife.

The Family Court had ordered the husband to pay Rs 5,000 per month from January 14, 2017, to December 31, 2020, Rs 6,000 per month from January 1, 2021, to August 31, 2024, and Rs 7,000 per month from September 1, 2024, onwards.

High Court upholds maintenance order

The High Court observed that if a woman “cannot reasonably hope to live with dignity” in her husband’s house, she has sufficient reason to refuse to stay there. It added that any offer by the husband to resume cohabitation must be genuine and not aimed merely at avoiding the obligation to pay maintenance.

According to the case, the couple married on April 16, 2012. The wife alleged that immediately after marriage she was harassed by her husband’s family over dowry demands. She further claimed that on June 4, 2014, the husband assaulted her with a waist belt, forcing her to approach the police before eventually moving to her parental home.

The husband opposed the maintenance plea, arguing that the wife had left the matrimonial home without sufficient reason and that her filing of a divorce petition showed she was unwilling to cohabit with him.

Court cites harassment and financial dependence

However, the court noted that the wife’s allegations of harassment and assault remained unshaken during cross-examination. It also observed that despite receiving notice, the husband chose not to contest the divorce proceedings.

“Refusal or neglect on the part of husband may be proved not only by express words, but also by his conduct,” the court said.

The High Court further held that there was no material on record to show that the wife was earning or capable of maintaining herself independently.

Also Watch:

Referring to Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court reiterated that the provision is intended to prevent destitution and provide support to dependants.

Finding no merit in the husband’s plea, the court dismissed the revision application and directed him to clear the arrears within one month.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/