Abuse in marriage is not limited to physical or mental acts, it can also be economic; and financially threatening to a partner. In a time when numerous cases have left the youth questioning the sanctity of an institution like marriage which was previously held in high regard in the country’s culture, a new order by the Allahabad High Court has raised hopes for justice.The court recently dismissed a petition filed by a husband seeking expedited disposal of a maintenance case against his wife, terming the litigation ‘vexatious’ and ‘born out of false pretences’.Justice Vinod Diwakar, while exercising supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution imposed a compensatory cost of ₹15,00,000 on the petitioner-husband for suppressing material facts and subjecting his wife to systemic economic depletion.
A marriage that quickly transformed
The petitioner and respondent tied the knot on May 18, 2019 when both were preparing for competitive exams. Shortly after, the respondent, the wife, secured a government job as an Additional Private Secretary at the High Court of Allahabad. The petitioner, the husband, remained unemployed despite being a law graduate and a registered advocate.Soon, disputes arose and led to multiple litigations. The husband filed a maintenance application under Section 144 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Etawah.
He soon approached the High Court with a prayer to expedite the proceedings, claiming he had no independent source of income and was suffering from numerous health issues as well, due to the stress of the litigation.
The petitioner’s slew of ‘troubles’
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the respondent-wife had spoiled his career by filing false FIRs and a divorce petition. It was added that the petitioner had to travel long distances for court dates and had developed serious health issues.
He maintained that he is an “unemployed youth” with no source of income for survival.
A series of false allegations
Counsel for the wife revealed a completely different and eye-opening narrative. She submitted that the petitioner came from a politically influential family and was a civil contractor before joining the legal profession. She alleged that the petitioner is a “compulsive liar” who took two personal loans totalling over ₹25 lakhs from the wife’s salary account under the guise of purchasing land but spent it all on “alcoholic drinks and leading a luxurious life.
“The wife further revealed that she was at the time paying a monthly EMI of ₹26,020 for these loans along with paying the husband ₹5,000 per month as interim maintenance under a separate order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The final verdict
The court conducted an examination of bank statements, affidavits and records from Family Courts to find that the petitioner husband had sworn false affidavits.He failed to disclose that he was already receiving ₹5,000 per month as maintenance.
He also did not reveal that the proceedings he sought to “expedite” had already been stayed by a coordinate bench of the High Court.The court noted that Section 144 BNSS primarily contemplates maintenance for wives, children and parents. Citing B. Clement v. Mcthel Thanga Annam and Malleshwaramma v. G.S. Srinivasulu, the Court held that “the legislature would not have intended to clothe the husband with the right to claim maintenance from his wife under this chapter.” Moreover, it also noted the financial exploitation of the respondent. “Economic abuse within marriage operates in insidious ways: through control over income, coercive appropriation of assets, and the gradual erosion of financial independence,” said Justice Diwakar. The court described the husband as a “well-built, shameless youth, who had no respect for the hard work, sincerity and loyalty ” of his wife.The husband’s petition was dismissed due to a lack of bona fides and to address the “marital exploitation” and “unjust enrichment” the court ordered the husband to pay₹15,00,000 to the wife within six weeks.If he fails to do so, the District Magistrate, Etawah, is directed to recover the amount as arrears of land revenue. Moreover, the trial court is directed to expedite the proceedings for divorce under Section 21-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. The court concluded by stating that the law must evolve to recognise that “justice within marriage is not merely symbolic but materially enforceable.”
