Wife claims HIV after marriage, Chhattisgarh High Court raises alimony to Rs 7 lakh

The parties solemnised their marriage on April 16, 2017, as per social rites and rituals and from their wedlock, a daughter was born on August 26, 2018, who passed away. The husband filed an application before the family court, seeking divorce, alleging that his wife was suffering from Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and was HIV-positive even before the birth of the child. 

Justices Parth Prateem Sahu and Sachin Singh Rajput heard a matrimonial dispute over alimony enhancement.

Marriage, pregnancy and HIV

He further alleged that their child was also born HIV-positive, and because HIV is transmitted through sexual contact, in view of his wife’s medical condition, the parties couldn’t maintain a physical relationship or lead a normal marital life. Therefore, he sought divorce. 

The wife specifically asserted that she was neither HIV-positive nor suffering from AIDS before her marriage and that she was diagnosed as HIV positive only after the marriage. She claimed that she had been faithfully performing her obligations and taking proper care of her matrimonial family. 

According to her, it was the legal and moral obligation of the husband to bear her medical expenses and provide for her maintenance and other necessities. On these grounds, she prayed for dismissal of the divorce petition. The family court granted the divorce, and therefore the woman has filed an appeal before the high court.

Advocate Anirudh Shrivastava, on behalf of the wife, submitted that he is not challenging the divorce. However, prayed that the wife be awarded permanent alimony to enable her to maintain herself and meet her livelihood expenses.

Advocate Manoj Kumar Dubey representing the husband submitted that he was ready to pay Rs 5 lakh to his wife towards permanent alimony, and would pay Rs 3 lakh out of the said amount within one month and the remaining amount in six monthly instalments.

‘Alimony enhanced’

Holding that the wife was suffering from HIV and would require continuous medical treatment, the court directed the husband to pay Rs 7 lakh instead of Rs 5 lakh, as he is a government employee and has a regular source of income, whereas the woman was earning Rs 6,000 per month.

The court also noted that the woman had obtained a Rs 2 lakh loan for her late daughter’s treatment and was paying an EMI of Rs 3,200 per month. It ordered the husband to pay Rs 3 lakh by August 7, 2026, and the remaining amount of Rs 4 lakh in two six-monthly instalments on or before July 7, 2027, to the woman out of the alimony amount.