RAIPUR: In a significant legal pronouncement, the Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled against a woman's plea for maintenance from her estranged husband, citing her adulterous conduct as a disqualifying factor under Section 125(4) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
The ruling came while the High Court Single Bench Judge Justice Arvind Kumar Verma was hearing two criminal revision petitions challenging a Family Court order in Raipur. The lower court had directed the husband to pay Rs 4,000 monthly maintenance to his wife, a decision contested by both parties. The husband sought a complete annulment of the order, while the wife demanded an increase to Rs 20,000.
The counsel for the husband argued that his wife was ineligible for maintenance as she was found to be in an adulterous relationship with his younger brother. This fact, he pointed out, was already legally established through a divorce decree granted by the Family Court on 8 September 2023. He contended that the Family Court overlooked this crucial evidence and disregarded Section 125(4) of the CrPC, which explicitly disallows maintenance for a wife living in adultery or leaving her marital home without a valid reason.
Conversely, the wife's legal representative refuted the claim of ongoing adultery. They argued that any past extramarital affair was not a continuous act at the time she filed the maintenance application. The counsel stressed that "living in adultery" necessitates an ongoing illicit relationship, which they claimed was not the case as the wife was residing with her brother and sister-in-law. Furthermore, they argued that the Rs 4,000 maintenance awarded was insufficient, considering the wife's lack of independent income and the husband's alleged multiple sources of revenue.
However, the Chhattisgarh High Court sided with the husband. It observed that the divorce decree, which was granted on the grounds of the wife's adultery, constituted legal proof of her disqualification under Section 125(4) of the CrPC. The High Court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in Shanthakumari v. Thimmegowda, which established that a wife proven to be living in adultery during the marriage is not entitled to maintenance, and a subsequent divorce on those grounds does not reinstate her claim.
The High Court underscored that it could not override or disregard a valid divorce decree issued by a competent court, especially when adultery was the primary basis for the dissolution of marriage. The court further noted that continuing an adulterous relationship even after separation further negated the wife's eligibility for maintenance.
Consequently, the Chhattisgarh High Court allowed the husband's revision petition, thereby setting aside the Family Court's maintenance order. The wife's petition seeking an enhancement of the maintenance amount was accordingly dismissed.
The ruling came while the High Court Single Bench Judge Justice Arvind Kumar Verma was hearing two criminal revision petitions challenging a Family Court order in Raipur. The lower court had directed the husband to pay Rs 4,000 monthly maintenance to his wife, a decision contested by both parties. The husband sought a complete annulment of the order, while the wife demanded an increase to Rs 20,000.
The counsel for the husband argued that his wife was ineligible for maintenance as she was found to be in an adulterous relationship with his younger brother. This fact, he pointed out, was already legally established through a divorce decree granted by the Family Court on 8 September 2023. He contended that the Family Court overlooked this crucial evidence and disregarded Section 125(4) of the CrPC, which explicitly disallows maintenance for a wife living in adultery or leaving her marital home without a valid reason.
Conversely, the wife's legal representative refuted the claim of ongoing adultery. They argued that any past extramarital affair was not a continuous act at the time she filed the maintenance application. The counsel stressed that "living in adultery" necessitates an ongoing illicit relationship, which they claimed was not the case as the wife was residing with her brother and sister-in-law. Furthermore, they argued that the Rs 4,000 maintenance awarded was insufficient, considering the wife's lack of independent income and the husband's alleged multiple sources of revenue.
However, the Chhattisgarh High Court sided with the husband. It observed that the divorce decree, which was granted on the grounds of the wife's adultery, constituted legal proof of her disqualification under Section 125(4) of the CrPC. The High Court referred to the Supreme Court's judgment in Shanthakumari v. Thimmegowda, which established that a wife proven to be living in adultery during the marriage is not entitled to maintenance, and a subsequent divorce on those grounds does not reinstate her claim.
The High Court underscored that it could not override or disregard a valid divorce decree issued by a competent court, especially when adultery was the primary basis for the dissolution of marriage. The court further noted that continuing an adulterous relationship even after separation further negated the wife's eligibility for maintenance.
Consequently, the Chhattisgarh High Court allowed the husband's revision petition, thereby setting aside the Family Court's maintenance order. The wife's petition seeking an enhancement of the maintenance amount was accordingly dismissed.
You may also like
Arne Slot drops hint on Liverpool's major summer spending with 'extra weapons' admission
Did DOGE cuts cause Mexican ship's deadly crash into Brooklyn Bridge? US senator makes wild claim: 'Meddling by Trump...'
Tottenham star says Ruben Amorim is driving force behind his career - 'He's magnificent'
Arne Slot points finger at the dark art threatening to become a Premier League plague
Pep Guardiola makes 'massive' admission as Man City face prospect of missing Champions League
