New Delhi: Five years ago, a trial court granted a woman monthly maintenance of Rs 26,000 in a domestic violence case after she alleged she had been subjected to years of physical, sexual, verbal, and economic abuse by her husband, including repeated humiliation, derogatory remarks, and being called a “prostitute”.
Last week, the Delhi High Court said that she might have to repay the entire interim or temporary maintenance, with six percent interest, if her husband’s adultery allegations against her turned out to be true. The high court ruled that the wife would not be entitled to maintenance if the magistrate or trial court, upon assessing the evidence, found she was in an adulterous relationship after leaving her matrimonial home.
“In the event the learned magistrate/trial court, upon appreciation of evidence led by the parties, comes to the conclusion that the respondent-wife is not entitled to maintenance on account of living in adultery, the respondent-wife shall be liable to return the entire amount of interim maintenance received by her to the petitioner-husband, along with interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum, in accordance with law,” ruled a bench of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
However, Sharma also emphasised that the court could not interfere with earlier orders, without evidence of adultery, which had to be established in a trial court. Citing the definition of an “aggrieved person” under Section 2(a) of the the 2005 Act, the court said “any woman who is, or has been, in a domestic relationship with the respondent and who alleges to have been subjected to any act of domestic violence” could not be disentitled from maintenance under the Act, simply because of the husband’s allegations of cheating.
The order was passed in a matrimonial dispute that stems from a 2021 trial court order, granting her monthly maintenance while allowing her plea under Section 23 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005, which allows courts to grant temporary or interim maintenance while a case is ongoing.
This provision allows courts to pass such orders, even if the other party is not present in court, only if it is satisfied that the other side has indulged in domestic violence against their partner or is likely to commit such an act.
Two years later, a district judge upheld the order after the husband appealed the trial court’s 2021 decision, which had directed him to pay her Rs 26,000 per month as maintenance for the time being.
‘Adultery’ vs ‘fabricated photos’
The couple got married in September 2014. They separated shortly after because of marital differences, and she left the husband’s home, alleging he had been calling her derogatory names, such as “prostitute”, and ill-treating her. She then filed a plea under the 2005 Act, seeking maintenance before the trial court, saying she had been subjected to sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic harassment, besides making dowry demands.
In 2021, the trial court awarded her Rs 26,000 per month to meet expenses until the case was disposed of. Two years later, this was upheld by a district judge in 2023, hearing the husband’s appeal against the 2021 order.
The husband then challenged the 2023 order in the Delhi High Court, claiming she had been living with another man and submitting photos to support his claim.
However, the wife’s lawyers said that the photos were fabricated or morphed.
The husband further questioned the lower court’s assessment of his income, which included fixed deposits from his parents. His lawyers said that while the court calculated his monthly income at Rs 79,000, his actual income was Rs 25,000. They said that his wife, a graduate, earned more while his education was only up to Class 10 grade.
‘Character assassination, miscarriage’
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma’s 4 February order noted that at this stage, the husband’s allegations of adultery against the wife could not be adjudicated upon without looking at the evidence. The evidence, however, had to be gathered by the trial court, it noted.
The high court noted that the wife alleged she was being subjected to character assassination and had even suffered a miscarriage and left employment, owing to the husband and his family’s cruelty.
Pointing out the two Delhi High Court decisions, Justice Sharma decided that the husband’s allegations could only be established by the trial court. Although Section 125(4) disentitles a woman from maintenance on grounds of adultery, the high court said it could not interfere with the 2021 and 2023 orders until evidence in the present case is looked into.
Meanwhile, it directed the wife to file an affidavit before the trial court, undertaking to return the amount of interim maintenance received by her, along with interest at the rate of six percent per annum, “in the event she is ultimately found not entitled to maintenance on the ground of living in adultery”.
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)
Also Read: ‘Left matrimonial home on her own’ — Allahabad HC order refusing maintenance to estranged wife