The Punjab and Haryana High Court has clarified that a wife cannot be denied maintenance just because she holds a graduate degree, particularly when she is not employed and has no independent source of income.
"The mere fact that the respondent/wife is a graduate would not itself mean that she can be denied of the Right of Maintenance which is conferred upon her by way of a statutory provision unless the right to seek maintenance can be curtailed under the grounds which have been mentioned under Section 125 Cr.P.C," said Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri.
The Court emphasized that unless the wife is earning enough to support herself or her income exceeds that of the husband, her educational qualifications alone cannot be grounds to deny her maintenance.
In the case at hand, the woman is a graduate but currently unemployed and has the sole custody of a six-year-old daughter. Despite her qualifications, the High Court noted that she has no income to support herself or her child.
"By no stretch of imagination, it can be said that the aforesaid even quantum of maintenance is on the higher side,"
Read also:- MP High Court: Writ Petition Not Maintainable for Advocate’s Unpaid Fees
the Court said, upholding the Family Court’s decision which had fixed the monthly maintenance at ₹14,000—₹9,000 for the wife and ₹5,000 for the minor daughter.
The couple had married in 2018, and a female child was born in 2019. The child remains in the custody of the wife.
Challenging the Family Court's order, the husband argued that his monthly income was ₹34,033 as a Collection Branch Manager at Piramal Capital Housing Finance Ltd. He claimed to have substantial financial liabilities including yearly insurance premiums and monthly car loan EMIs, along with the responsibility of supporting his elderly grandparents.
Read also:- Why did the Supreme Court Suspend Kiran Kumar's Sentence in Vismaya Dowry Death Case?
"For the purpose of considering and deciding the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C, a liability is to be fastened upon the husband which is not only a statutory liability under an enactment but also a social, economic and moral responsibility."
Justice Puri further clarified that financial liabilities such as EMIs or familial obligations cannot override the husband's legal responsibility to support his wife and child.
The husband's counsel also argued that the wife, being a B.A. and PGDCA graduate, was capable of earning. This too was rejected by the Court, affirming that educational qualifications alone do not disqualify a wife from receiving maintenance if she is not gainfully employed.
Read also:- Karnataka Bike Taxi Ban Opposed by Women: Commuters Highlight Safety, Affordability Before High Court
Concluding the matter, the Court upheld the Family Court's order and imposed a cost of ₹10,000 on the husband, directing him to deposit the amount with the Family Court, Ludhiana within three months.
“The liability is fixed as per the law and therefore, such an argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is unsustainable,” the Court firmly held.
Advocate Mr. Amandeep Singh appeared on behalf of Mr. R.K. Malik, Advocate.
