Allahabad High Court slams husband for expressing ‘willingness to keep wife’ as shield to avoid maintenance

“A father who seeks to avoid maintenance on the ground of willingness to keep the child and wife must show genuine concern and responsibility, not merely make a formal statement in Court,” the Allahabad High Court remarked while rejecting his plea.

Plea before the court

• The marriage between the parties was solemnised in 2012 according to Muslim Personal Law and a daughter was born to them.
• The wife alleged that she was subjected to cruelty and dowry demands, and was ultimately expelled from the matrimonial home along with the child. She contended that she did not have any independent source of income and was unable to maintain herself and the child.
• The husband denied the allegations and claimed that he earned only Rs 250 per day as a stabiliser repair mechanic. He further alleged that the wife was earning Rs 50,000 per month through tuition and beauty parlour work.
• The Allahabad High Court found that the husband, admittedly working as an electrician/mechanic, had failed to substantiate either his alleged low income of just Rs 250 per day or the claim regarding the wife’s earnings.
• The court observed that the wife produced material, including municipal tax assessment records, sale deeds and pleadings from civil suits, indicating that the husband and his family were engaged in an electronics business.
• It further noted that a “bald allegation” of earning, without proof, cannot defeat a claim for maintenance, particularly where the wife is maintaining a minor daughter and the husband has failed to disclose his true financial capacity.

‘Defence to defeat maintenance’

The Allahabad High Court also took note of the husband’s conduct during proceedings before it. “Before this court itself, the revisionist sought mediation but failed to deposit even the amount directed for initiating the process. His conduct shows that the plea of willingness is more in the nature of a defence to defeat maintenance than a genuine effort to resume matrimonial obligations,” it remarked.

Reiterating that Section 125 (maintenance provision) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is a measure of social justice intended to prevent destitution and vagrancy, the Allahabad High Court held that once the family court had found that the wife was residing separately for sufficient reasons, the maintenance order could not be set aside based on “self-serving assertions of poverty.”

“Once the Family Court has found that the wife is living separately for sufficient reasons, has no independent income, and the husband has sufficient earning capacity, the order of maintenance cannot be interfered with merely on the basis of self-serving assertions of poverty,” the judge observed.

The Allahabad High Court held that the amount awarded by the family court was modest and could not be termed excessive considering the present living costs, educational expenses and the obligation of the father to maintain his child.

It also noted that the family court had granted the facility of payment of arrears in five quarterly instalments, which sufficiently balanced the interests of the husband. “The impugned order reflects due consideration of pleadings, affidavits, cross-examination, and documentary material. No perversity or illegality is made out,” the court held while dismissing the man’s plea.