Jharkhand High Court rejects ‘assumptions’ on income, grants wife Rs 30 lakh alimony

“The process of determining maintenance cannot begin or end with assumptions, and it must rest on an assessment of the earning capacity of the person from whom maintenance is sought. If both spouses are earning, the income of each must be examined,” the court said in its July 20 order.

The court underscored that the grant of maintenance ensures that a woman is not forced to rely on her parents or relatives for basic needs, but can live with dignity and autonomy.

The bench said that only when adequate maintenance is granted can she hope to secure independent accommodation, meet her daily expenses, and denying or reducing maintenance on the assumption that her parents can support her effectively undermines the very purpose of the law of maintenance, which seeks to protect a deserted or destitute spouse from financial helplessness.

“In every proceeding of determination of alimony, there are two sides to a human story- that of the wife and that of the husband. Each brings forth a version shaped by their experiences, grievances, and perceptions. It is the duty of the court to assess these narratives not mechanically but pragmatically, and to arrive at a conclusion that is grounded in both evidence and social reality,” it remarked.

Divorce final, alimony fight remained

The woman and man were married on February 12, 2017, according to Oraon tribal custom in Latehar, Jharkhand. After about four years of marriage, the husband filed a divorce petition before the family court in Latehar, Jharkhand, on July 23, 2021, alleging cruelty and desertion under the Hindu Marriage Act. The family court accepted his claims and granted a decree of divorce on November 22, 2022, prompting the wife to file a plea before the high court.

Justices Sujit Narayan Prasad and Sanjay Prasad said that the grant of maintenance ensures that a woman is not forced to rely on her parents or relatives for basic needs.

During the pendency of the plea, the husband remarried on January 11, 2025, making reconciliation impossible. After that, both parties agreed not to contest the divorce on the merits and requested the high court to decide only the issue of permanent alimony.

The wife stated that she had no independent source of income except helping her mother run a roadside vegetable stall, while the husband disclosed that he was serving as a constable with a gross monthly salary of Rs 66,097 and was already paying maintenance pursuant to an earlier order.

Husband is also to survive: Order

The court noted that it is evident that while the wife is agreeable to the decree of divorce subject to receipt of permanent alimony, the respondent-husband has pleaded financial incapacity.

The court underlined that once the income, whether actual or notional, is determined, the family court must then proceed to apportion the same among the dependents, including the wife and any children, keeping in view their reasonable needs and standard of living. “Therefore, assessing income is the first and most crucial step, as maintenance cannot be determined in a vacuum,” it added.

The order continued that, however, where the wife is not employed or has no independent source of income, the focus naturally shifts to the income of the husband, which becomes the foundation for fixing the amount of maintenance payable.

The bench noted that such assessment of income may be of two kinds. It noted that in cases where documentary evidence such as salary slips, bank statements, or income tax returns is available, the court can take the actual income as discernible from the record.

However, the court acknowledged that in many cases, the husband either fails to disclose his true income, conceals relevant details, or claims to be unemployed despite indications to the contrary. “In such circumstances, the courts must make a reasonable and fair assessment of the husband’s income, taking into account his educational qualifications, professional background, past employment, lifestyle, bank transactions, and other material placed on record,” it said.

Considering that the appellant-wife is only 28 years of age and taking into consideration the life expectancy of a female in India is 70 years approximately, the court said that the permanent alimony is to be calculated for the next 42 years.

The court said it is conscious that the husband is also to survive and he has other liabilities and responsibilities, but it is also his utmost duty to maintain the standard of life of the wife she would have enjoyed during subsistence of the marriage as per the income and status of her husband.