New Delhi, March 20: The Delhi High Court recently rejected a maintenance plea, emphasizing an important principle: a well-educated wife with relevant job experience should not avoid employment simply to claim maintenance from her husband.
The case involved a petitioner who held a master's degree from Australia and had prior professional experience in Dubai. She sought interim maintenance, but her living arrangements—first with her parents and later with her maternal uncle—raised concerns that she was attempting to portray herself as unable to earn a living.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, who presided over the case, observed that the petitioner was highly educated and had considerable exposure to the world. Unlike women with limited opportunities who may rely on their spouses for support, the petitioner had the skills and qualifications to become financially independent. The Court urged her to actively pursue employment instead of depending on maintenance.
Adding complexity to the case, a WhatsApp conversation between the petitioner and her mother came under scrutiny. In the conversation, the mother allegedly suggested that accepting a job could undermine the petitioner’s alimony claims. While the authenticity of the conversation is yet to be verified in trial, the court viewed it as prima facie evidence of intentional unemployment. The timing of the exchange, occurring prior to the filing of the maintenance petition, suggested that the petitioner may have deliberately chosen not to work to strengthen her case for maintenance.
As a result, the court ruled that the petitioner was not entitled to interim maintenance and dismissed her plea challenging the family court’s earlier order, which had denied her maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
