The Rajasthan High Court accepted a revision appeal brought by a divorced woman seeking maintenance, holding that the term “wife” refers to a woman who has got a divorce and has not remarried.
Â
Rajasthan’s High Court The court has ruled that a woman who has been subjected to domestic violence by her husband cannot be considered to have abandoned him or to have freely relocated to another state. According to the court, if the husband’s circumstances aren’t conducive, the wife will be pushed away.
Â
A woman who is abused by her husband cannot be regarded to have left him or as living away from him. The court went on to state that if the conditions that the husband set were not favourable, the wife would be forced to leave. The petitioner, who is the wife, states that the respondent, who is the husband, is employed by the Bank of Baroda as a Branch Manager and makes an income of Rs. 90,000.00 per month.
She argued that the trial court had denied her the monthly maintenance payment exclusively for the reason that the parties had been granted a divorce and that this was the sole reason for the decision. According to her, the respondent filed for divorce while she was still married.
Section 125(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Â
The petitioner’s counsel stated that the explanation that the definition of “wife” includes a woman who has been divorced by her husband or has received a divorce from her husband and has not remarried was wrong about the proviso to Section 125(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The attorney argued that since the petitioner-wife has not remarried, she is entitled to maintenance, and any divorce petition cannot be interpreted as being voluntary desertion of the parties because she has not remarried after the divorce petition was filed.
It was also argued that because there was evidence of cruelty, the marriage should be considered dissolved; nevertheless, just because this occurred does not imply that the respondent-husband should be exonerated from the responsibility of paying maintenance.
Through the current petition for criminal revision, the petitioner, who is the wife, is requesting that the respondent, who is the husband, pay her a sum of Rs. 30,000 every month beginning on the day that the application was submitted.
Dr. Justice Pushpendra Singh Bhati made the following observation as he was admitting the current revision petition and quashing the ruling made by the Family Court:
After listening to the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of the case, this court has concluded that the learned court below has issued a judgment without taking into consideration the definition of wife that is provided in Section 125(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The support was denied on the grounds of divorce and cruelty by the learned court below, which constitutes a gross error on their part. One thing that must be given is upkeep, and a woman who is being mistreated cannot be considered to have fled her home or to be living away from it freely. If the husband creates conditions that are not conducive, the wife will invariably become estranged from him.
The court ruled that the petitioner, who is the wife, is entitled to receive maintenance from the respondent, who is the husband, in the amount of Rs.10,000/-per month beginning on the day that the petition was submitted. Additionally, the court made it clear that any interim maintenance that is awarded would be deducted from the total amount that is owed.
On behalf of the respondent, Adv. Kaushal Gautam and Adv. Kunal Kalla appeared in court, while on behalf of the petitioner, Adv. Kan Singh Oad did so.
Read more-Â Assam news channel hacked, displays Pakistan Flag
Richa Dharu vs. Hemant Panwar
