Divorced Wife Living In Adultery Not Entitled To Maintenance: Chhattisgarh High Court
Last Updated:
The HC quashed the Rs 4,000 monthly maintenance awarded to a woman by a family court, stating she was disqualified under law
The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that a woman who has been granted a divorce on the proven ground of adultery is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The court quashed the Rs 4,000 monthly maintenance awarded to the wife by the family court, stating she was disqualified under law.
The bench of Justice Arvind Kumar Verma delivered the judgment while hearing two revision petitions—one filed by the husband challenging the maintenance order and the other by the wife seeking an enhancement of it.
The couple had married in July 2019, but the relationship soon turned acrimonious. The wife alleged mental torture and neglect by the husband and his family, claiming she was forced to leave the matrimonial home in March 2021. She moved the family court in Raipur seeking Rs 20,000 in monthly maintenance, citing the husband's multiple income sources, including a government job and rental earnings.
The husband, however, contended that the wife was involved in an adulterous relationship with his younger brother, leading him to file for divorce—a claim the family court accepted, granting divorce on grounds of adultery in September 2023.
Despite this, the family court awarded the wife Rs 4,000 in maintenance, a decision the high court found flawed. Referring to Section 125(4) CrPC, which bars maintenance to a wife living in adultery, Justice Verma held that the divorce decree served as conclusive proof of the wife's disqualification.
'Suppose a decree for divorce is granted on the ground of her living in adultery, can it be said that the said disqualification of which she was suffering from all along, during the subsistence of the marriage, will cease to exist, because of the decree for divorce? The prudent answer to this question shall be an emphatic 'No," he held.
The court stressed that the decree obtained by the husband for divorce on proving the adulterous life of the wife cannot give a licence to her to continue to live in an illicit relationship and to get her right to claim maintenance revived.
Further, rejecting the wife's argument that she was no longer living in adultery at the time of seeking maintenance, the high court clarified that the phrase 'living in adultery" under Section 125(4) should be interpreted in the context of proven sustained conduct during the subsistence of the marriage.
The court cited various precedents, including rulings from the Supreme Court and other high courts, emphasising that occasional lapses do not amount to 'living in adultery", but a decree based on consistent adulterous conduct cannot be brushed aside.
'A divorced wife, who lives in adultery, viz., living in an illicit relationship with a man other than her former husband is disqualified from claiming maintenance, under Section 125 of the Code," the court held.
With this, the high court allowed the husband's plea and dismissed the wife's application for enhanced maintenance. The family court's order was set aside, with directions to comply promptly.
First Published:
May 28, 2025, 15:52 IST
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Exploring old law allowing ‘push back': Sarma
The Assam government is looking into the details of 'an old law' that will allow it to 'push back' infiltrators without having to mandatorily approach foreigners tribunals, chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma said on Saturday. Speaking to reporters on the sidelines of a programme in Nalbari, Sarma said that a constitutional bench of the Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, had said that there is no legal requirement for the Assam government to always approach the judiciary in order to identify foreigners. 'There exists an immigrants expel order, which is an old law. The Supreme Court has said that this law is in force and a deputy commissioner can give permission for immediate pushback under it,' he maintained. 'For whatever reason, our lawyers had not informed us and we too didn't know about it. The entire matter has come to light in the last few days. We will now discuss it further,' he added. The chief minister said pushing back illegal migrants will continue, adding that the process of identifying foreigners, which had been paused due to NRC-related matters, will now be accelerated. 'And when the identification of a foreigner happens, there will be no need to send the case to any tribunal. We will directly push them back. We have been preparing for it,' he added. Sarma said the process of pushback will continue, though no person with a case pending before the court will be sent back. His comments came even as the state witnessed protests over 'harassment' of minorities in the name of detecting illegal immigrants. Members and supporters of the All Assam Minority Students' Union (AAMSU) wore black badges and displayed placards against the purported recent pushback of Bangladeshis in the state. They carried out the protest in different parts, including Chirang and Jogighopa, after Eid namaz.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Family of UP woman cop, found dead in May, alleges she was sexually assaulted
A 27-year-old woman constable of the Uttar Pradesh Police was found dead in her rented accommodation in Lucknow on May 27. Her body was discovered hanging, in what is now emerging as a case of abetment to suicide following serious allegations of blackmail, sexual exploitation and financial constable, originally from Amroha district, had joined the UP Police in 2019. She was initially posted to Ghazipur police station and had been working at Madiyaon police station for the past two victim's family has accused a man named Satwant, also from Amroha, of repeatedly blackmailing her, sexually exploiting her, and extorting nearly Rs 12.5 lakh from her. The constable was found dead in her house in the Sarvodaya Nagar area. Following the family's complaint, a case of abetment to suicide has been registered against the accused at the Ghazipur police Commissioner of Police (Crime) Babloo Kumar confirmed that Satwant is currently absconding and efforts are on to trace him."Preliminary investigation has revealed that the constable was under severe financial and emotional stress. We are conducting a thorough investigation, and further action will be taken based on the evidence," he said.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Preventive detention extraordinary power of state, use it sparingly: Top court
Preventive detention is an extraordinary power in the hands of the state that must be used sparingly, said the Supreme Court as it set aside an order by a district magistrate to detain a moneylender who was allegedly indulging in illegal activities again after getting bail in four cases.A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Manmohan questioned the contention of the detaining authority that the order was passed as the detainee was violating bail conditions in the cases, and noted that they should have instead moved the competent court seeking cancellation of the order of detention dated June 20, 2024, and the impugned judgment dated September 4, 2024, passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam are hereby set aside. In the attending facts and circumstances of this case, the appeal is allowed," the bench said in its order passed on Friday. Noting that the power of preventive detention finds recognition in the Constitution under Article 22(3)(b), the bench said, "The provision for preventive detention is an extraordinary power in the hands of the state that must be used sparingly. It curtails the liberty of an individual in anticipation of the commission of further offence(s), and therefore, must not be used in the ordinary course of nature."The bench said the contention of the detaining authority that the detainee, Rajesh, who used to run a private financing company called 'Rithika Finance', was violating the conditions of bail imposed upon him in the cases that have been considered for passing the order of said that pertinently, no application has been filed by the respondent in any of the four cases, alleging violation of such conditions, if any, and moreover, have not even been spelt out during the hearing of the case filed by his wife against the Kerala High Court order, which affirmed the preventive detention order of the Palakkad district magistrate."Keeping in view the above expositions of law, we have no doubt that the order of detention cannot be sustained. The circumstances pointed out in the order by the detaining authority may be ground enough for the state to approach the competent courts for cancellation of bail, but it cannot be said that the same warranted his preventive detention."We clarify that if such an application for cancellation of the detainee's bail is made by the respondent - state, the same must be decided uninfluenced by the observations made hereinabove," the bench referred to the provisions of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, and said that the object of the statute was to provide for effective prevention of certain anti-social activities in the bench said Section 2(j) of the state law defines 'goonda' as a person who indulges in activities that are harmful to the maintenance of public order, either directly or indirectly, and includes persons who are bootleggers, counterfeiters, drug offenders, and loan sharks, among bench also said that under Section 3 of the Act, the district magistrate so authorised or the government may pass an order directing detention of a "known goonda" to prevent commission of antisocial activities within the state of Kerala."Coming to the attending facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that the exercise of power under Section 3 of the Act was not justified in law," the top court said, as it noted four cases lodged under the Kerala Money Lenders Act, 1958, cited by the police for recommending preventive detention to the district police stated that the detainee was a "notorious goonda" in the district and a threat to the society at by the order of his detention dated June 20, 2024, Rajesh's wife filed a writ petition before the Kerala High Court assailing the order and praying for a writ of habeas corpus to the state against the "illegal" detention of her high court on September 4 last year affirmed the order of preventive detention. Aggrieved by the order, the detainee's wife moved the top court challenging the December 10, 2024, the top court ordered the detainee to be released as his maximum period of detention under the Act was InMust Watch
