Delhi HC Rejects Woman's Plea For Maintenance In Divorce Case; Here's Why

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a well-educated wife who has the ability to earn should not choose to remain unemployed merely to claim financial support from her husband. The court emphasised that maintenance laws are designed to offer protection, not to encourage dependency.

In an order issued on Wednesday, March 20, 2025, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh clarified that Section 125 of the CrPC which governs maintenance for wives, children, and parents is intended to promote fairness between spouses rather than create financial reliance.

Delhi HC Rejects Woman's Plea For Maintenance In Divorce Case

The Delhi High Court has held that a well-qualified wife with previous work experience cannot deliberately remain jobless just to claim maintenance from her husband. Stressing the significance of women's education and financial independence, the Court asserted that individuals with the ability to earn should work towards self-reliance.

 Justice Chandra Dhari Singh stated that a woman with the necessary qualifications and prior work experience should not choose unemployment simply to seek maintenance. This decision was made while rejecting an appeal against a family court’s refusal to grant interim maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code in a marital dispute.

The couple, who married in 2019, relocated to Singapore soon after. The wife claimed she suffered mistreatment from her husband and in-laws, which forced her to return to India in February 2021. She also alleged that her husband cancelled her spousal visa, leaving her stranded in Singapore.

As per her statements, she completed her master’s degree in 2006 and worked in Dubai between 2005 and 2007. However, she had not been financially employed since then. She argued that the family court overlooked her significant employment gap, which demonstrated her long-standing financial dependence.

Don't Miss: Pakistani Entrepreneur Visits India Visa-Free Via Indigo; Here's How

She also claimed that her husband still possessed her valuables, leaving her no choice but to sell her jewelry to fund her return to India. Facing financial difficulties, she sought refuge with her maternal uncle.

As per NDTV, the husband refuted these allegations, asserting that his wife was highly educated and capable of earning a livelihood. He argued that unemployment alone did not justify a maintenance claim. Additionally, he contended that her demand for Rs 3,25,000 per month was unreasonable and did not accurately reflect either his financial status or her earning capacity.

Delhi High Court On The Case

The Court observed that despite having qualifications and being physically fit for employment, the petitioner chose to live with her parents and later her maternal uncle, portraying herself as financially dependant.

The Court highlighted prima facie evidence suggesting deliberate unemployment, citing a WhatsApp exchange between the petitioner and her mother. In the conversation—whose authenticity will be assessed during trial—the mother advised that taking up a job could weaken alimony claims.

Don't Miss: Yuzvendra Chahal-Dhanashree Verma Are Officially Divorced: Bombay High Court Speeding Up Legal Proceedings? Here's Why

This communication, sent before the maintenance petition was filed, strongly indicates an intentional decision to remain jobless to claim financial support.

“Considering the observations made above, the Court holds that qualified wives who are capable of earning but choose to remain unemployed should not be granted interim maintenance.”

Keep reading Herzindagi for more such stories.

Credits: Freepik