The Maintenance provisions under Indian law are biased against Men. Irrespective of the length of marriage, a woman can claim maintenance for life under Section 125 CrPC, subject to conditions such as remarriage or absence of charges against the husband.
A recent case from Karnataka in November 2022 highlights this issue, where a senior citizen man was ordered to pay maintenance to his wife, following the breakdown of their one-month marriage, despite the fact that he had married solely for companionship.
Case:
Suresh (name changed) got married to Latha (name changed) in March 2020 and the duo started living together in April 2020. While Suresh, an LIC agent, was 64-years-old then, while Latha was 58. The man was seeking partnership at this stage of life and thus decided to tie the knot. However, the marriage broke down within a month and both parted ways in May 2020.
Latha applied for divorce and was awarded interim maintenance of Rs 7,000 per month by the family court. Later, she withdrew the divorce petition, however, her maintenance order sustained.
Submission by Husband
Suresh challenged this maintenance order in the high court claiming that the wife had deserted and neglected him and thus, she was not eligible for maintenance amount. The husband also submitted that he was still “ready and willing to welcome the respondent-wife back and lead a happy married life.”
Argument by Wife
The wife however contended:
Though I stayed for a month with the petitioner it became impossible for me to live with him as he was constantly harassing me.
Karnataka High Court
Karnataka High Court Justice M Nagaprasanna Hears Arguments, Rules That Withdrawal of Divorce Petition Has No Impact on Maintenance Case
Clarifying that a woman is entitled to maintenance so long as she remains legally wedded wife, the Judge said,
So long as the respondent remains a legally wedded wife of the petitioner and the fact that she has been deserted by the husband, interim maintenance is a matter of right to the wife.
Upholding Lower Court Decision, Judge Stated:
The lower court judge had applied his mind to the issues before him and by balancing the right of both the petitioner and the respondent has rewarded a sum of Rs 7,000 to be paid to the respondent as interim maintenance.
Justice M Nagaprasanna Justifies Non-Interference with Lower Court Order:
Though the husband says he is willing to live with her he has not taken any action in that regard. It said he cannot take exception to the lower court order merely because the petitioner is ready and willing to take her back.
If that be so, the petitioner could have preferred a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, which he has not preferred till date.
Husband Contests Maintenance Award, Cites Lack of Adequate Income. Wife’s Application Highlights Husband’s Inherited Landholdings of Over Five Acres, Court Addresses:
The amount of maintenance awarded is Rs 7,000. The Court while awarding such maintenance has taken note of the fact that the petitioner and the respondent both are senior citizens.
Karnataka High Court Upholds Maintenance Order, Concludes:
So long as the respondent remains the wife, it is the duty of the petitioner to maintain the wife.
Husband and Estranged Wife’s Ages As of November 2022: 66 and 60 Years Old Respectively.
VFMI Perspective:
Women have abused the maintenance laws, which are heavily biased towards one gender (wives).
In many jurisdictions, the duration of marriage, number of children, and other relevant factors are considered in determining the merits of a maintenance case and the amount and duration of support awarded.
In India, certain women’s rights advocates have manipulated the system through promoting gender-biased laws, while selectively drawing references from Western legal frameworks.
Married men in India have been subjected to maintenance/alimony without any evidence of domestic abuse being established against them, resulting in them being controlled by the court system.
In the Indian justice system, interim maintenance once granted can persist for several years, even if the case is later determined to be false or malicious. However, there is currently no mechanism for redress or compensation for men who are wrongly ordered to pay maintenance.
This results in an unequal application of the law, with married men facing the possibility of being subjected to legal extortion without the possibility of recourse, disregarding the principle of equality and benefiting those who abuse the system.