No maintenance if divorce granted on the ground of adultery, says Chhattisgarh HC
The Chhattisgarh High Court has ruled that a divorced wife living in an illicit relationship with a man other than her former husband was disqualified from claiming maintenance.
The court, in a recent judgment, was hearing two criminal revision petitions filed by a computer operator from Raipur and his now divorced wife in which they had both challenged a 2024 family court order that had directed the male applicant to pay ₹4,000 per month as maintenance to his now divorced wife.
The man had challenged the order stating that the woman was found 'doing adultery' with his younger brother, which was proven before the family court, and prayed that a wife could not claim maintenance if she was living in adultery. He also submitted that his financial condition was not considered by the family court while pronouncing the verdict.
On the other hand, the woman's petition sought an increase in maintenance to ₹20,000 per month.
Definition of adultery
Both the applicants had solemnised their marriage on July 11, 2019 and the woman alleged that that after a few days of marriage, she was subjected to mental torture and her character questioned by the husband. She was also tortured by her in-laws by not providing meals for her on time. In March 2021, she went to her paternal home where she lost her mother during that period and since then has been residing with her brother, the petitions noted.
During the arguments, the counsel for the woman argued that there was a fine line of difference between the phrases i.e. 'living in adultery' and 'once lived in adultery' or 'once established physical relation with someone twice or thrice'.
The petitioner further submitted that having an extra-marital affair and living an adulterous life were completely different parameters. The man submitted that the divorce was granted under the Hindu Marriage Act by the competent court in 2023 on the ground of adultery.
After hearing the petitioners, Justice Arvind Kumar Verma set aside the family court order. In his judgment delivered on May 9, Justice Verma noted that a decree obtained by the husband for divorce on proving the adulterous life of the wife could not give a licence to her to continue to live in an illicit relationship and to get her right to claim maintenance revived.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- The Hindu
Karnataka High Court declines to quash case against KIADB officer caught while returning alleged bribe amount
The High Court of Karnataka has refused to quash a corruption case against an officer of the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB), who was caught in a 'reverse-trap' case when he was returning the alleged bribe money of ₹3 lakh in cash to the complainant. 'In a reverse trap scenario, the public servant allegedly returns money previously received as illegal gratification. These facts, when projected before the court, require a complex evidentiary matrix. The issues that arise in cases of reverse trap are distinct from a traditional trap. The central twist in a reverse trap would be as to why the public servant returns the money,' the court said. The court said the case requires investigation to demonstrate the innocence of a public servant, as the matter is still at the stage of investigation, to clear obfuscation about whether the bribe was ever demanded or accepted in the first place. Justice M. Nagaprasanna passed the order while dismissing a petition filed by A.B. Vijaya Kumar, who was working as Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO)-2 at KIADB, Bengaluru, during September 2022. The complainant, B.S. Arun, had alleged that he had sought a no-objection certificate from the KIADB for construction related to a temple at Laggere in Bengaluru. Though the petitioner-SLAO had demanded ₹4 lakh bribe and received ₹2.5 lakh through another person from his office for issuing the NoC, the document was not issued despite repeated requests. Hence, Mr. Arun had lodged a complaint with the Special Deputy Commissioner of the KIADB alleging that the petitioner was not issuing the NoC despite receiving the bribe. Following this complaint, the petitioner issued the NoC and is said to have offered to return the bribe amount as a donation to the temple with a request to Mr. Arun to withdraw the complaint made to the Special Deputy Commissioner. The Lokayukta police, acting on the complaint by Mr. Aurn, caught the petitioner red-handed when he was returning ₹3 lakh to the complainant. But it was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the complaint could not have been registered as there was no material for demand and acceptance besides there being mismatch of ₹50,000 between the alleged bribe amount received and returned. However, the court declined to interfere in the investigation, stating that the probe is essential to find out whether the bribe was in fact demanded and accepted as per the law.
New Indian Express
12 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Madras High Court initiates contempt proceedings against Tamil Nadu Chief Secretaries
CHENNAI: The Madras High Court has initiated suo motu contempt of court proceedings against officers who have served as the Chief Secretary of Tamil Nadu from September 19, 2023 until now for failing to take action as per the court's orders issued on that date in a batch of petitions filed regarding issues in providing appointments based on compassionate grounds to the dependents of government staff who died in harness. The directions issued to the Chief Secretary in the September 19, 2023 included a direction to set up a committee to look into the issues in the appointments on compassionate grounds and recommend necessary amendments to the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Appointment on Compassionate Grounds) Rules, 2023, to fix a time frame. Observing that a perusal of records by the court established that no such action had been taken, Justice Battu Devanand on Friday said that the court was of the 'prima facie opinion' that the Chief Secretary had failed to comply with the order. He directed the Registrar (Judicial) to get the particulars of the officers concerned and register a contempt case against them under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 read with Article 215 of the Constitution. The judge further directed the Registrar to issue notices to them to enable them to submit their response by June 20. It can be noted that incumbent Chief Secretary N. Muruganandam and his predecessor Shiv Das Meena have served in this post in the period mentioned by the court. The contempt of court proceedings has been initiated for failing to obey the orders, particularly in connection with a 2020 writ petition filed by a Nithya of Coimbatore, whose father died while working in the Transport department, for getting an appointment in the same department on compassionate grounds, and a batch of similar petitions. Expressing 'deep anguish' and 'displeasure' towards the attitude of the Chief Secretary for 'disrespecting the court's orders and failing to execute them in 'true letter and spirit,' Justice Battu Devanand said the present issue is a 'classic example' of the 'lethargic attitude' of several bureaucrats. He said that chief secretaries have no concern towards the common people and poor litigants. Such litigants are not able to enjoy the fruits of justice even after the passing of orders by the Madras High Court. He said the court intends to initiate the suo motu contempt proceedings to send a clear message to the bureaucrats, who are acting 'brazenly' and not implementing the court's orders.
The Print
17 hours ago
- The Print
Efforts should be made by police to use tech tools for fairness, efficacy: Delhi HC
In the present case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS) Act, certain contraband was recovered from a vehicle in transit after a chase without any video recording. The court observed that in absence of independent witnesses and videography, there is an added duty upon the court to scrutinise the evidence more carefully. New Delhi, Jun 7 (PTI) While technology enhances transparency of police investigation and ideally every effort should be made to use such aids, adopting the use of video or audio recording might not be feasible in some cases, the Delhi High Court has said while dismissing the bail plea of an accused in a narcotics case. The petitioner, who was allegedly found to be in possession of 10.860 kg of poppy straw, argued that there was a violation of provisions pertaining to entry, search, seizure and arrest under the NDPS Act. Subsequently, several more sacks of the contraband were allegedly recovered at his instance by the police. His counsel argued that the contraband was recovered in a crowded place but no sincere effort was made to join the public persons or to videograph the search and seizure proceedings conducted at the spot. In the judgement passed on June 5 dismissing the bail plea, Justice Ravinder Dudeja said that although there was admittedly no independent public witness of recovery or any photography/videography, it was at best a 'key irregularity' and there was nothing on record at this stage to suggest that the petitioner was not guilty. 'The use of technology certainly enhances the efficacy and transparency of the police investigation and assures fairness, and therefore, ideally, every effort should be made by the investigating agency to use technological means in aid of investigation. However, there may be situations where audio/video recording may not be feasible like the present case,' said the court. 'The absence of independent witnesses and the videography at best may be regarded as a key irregularity in a search and that would cast an added duty upon the court to scrutinise the evidence regarding the search more carefully,' it added. It noted that in the present case, there was information that contraband was being transported in a vehicle from Alwar, Rajasthan, to Azadpur in Delhi via Punjabi Bagh, and at the time when the petitioner and his co-accused were apprehended, they were shifting the contraband from the car to a motorcycle. The court said the period of the petitioner's custody since August 2023 or that the trial had commenced were by themselves not persuasive grounds for granting relief to the petitioner under the NDPS Act. PTI ADS RT RT This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
