Delhi court junks woman's maintenance plea, says she tried to hide financial and educational status to extort money

Indian Express

04-05-2025

A Delhi court has dismissed a woman's maintenance plea noting that she tried to conceal her financial condition and educational experience to extort money from her husband.
'It prima facie seems that the petitioner (wife) has tried to conceal her true financial condition and working and educational experience in order to extort money by way of maintenance from the respondent (husband),' said Judicial Magistrate First Class (Mahila Court) in her order on Friday.
The woman had sought interim maintenance of Rs 50,000 (including Rs 18,000 for rent) from her husband submitting in her affidavits that she was an unemployed graduate and had no income.
Advocate Pravesh Dabas, who appeared for the husband, said his client's income was Rs 55,000 and that he paid a rent of Rs 8,000 and an EMI of Rs 35,000.
The couple married in July 2022 and separated in October 2023. Their divorce proceedings are underway.
It was the husband's contention that his wife had not disclosed her complete educational qualification. He brought on record her diploma certificate in computer science and engineering and her BEd certificate. He also submitted an offer letter for her from Little Millennium Education Pvt Ltd. The wife disclosed that she had taught at GD Goenka School for a year from September 2022.
'It is very clear that the petitioner has not approached the Court with clean hands for the purpose of the present application. One who seeks equity must do equity. Granting any interim maintenance to the petitioner would amount to giving benefit of her own wrong to the petitioner,' the court said after hearing the man's submissions.
'In the above said judgments, as relied on by Ld. Counsel for respondent (husband), it was clearly mentioned that the Courts are not there to create an army of unemployed educationally qualified women. The petitioner as per the record brought forth by the respondent seems to be financially sound and capable of making independent source of earning. The petitioner (wife) in no way seems to be in the condition of destitution and vagrancy,' it added.
The husband argued that his wife had 'not deliberately disclosed' the fact that she had done additional courses to enhance her skills and that she had failed to disclose her past working experience. A copy of an income tax return from 2021 to 2022 was also submitted before the Court showing her income to be Rs 1.3 lakhs.
'No reasonable explanation is given throughout the argument as to why the concealments are there in the income affidavit and why the same come on record by the respondent and not by the petitioner,' the court said.
The wife had argued that the information could not be furnished before the court owing to 'human error'.