Unemployment Of Husband Would Not Absolve Him From Responsibility To Maintain His Wife: Delhi Court Upholds Interim Order Of Maintenance
Observing that mere fact that the husband is unemployed would not absolve him from his responsibility to maintain his wife, a Delhi Court has upheld an order awarding a meagre amount of interim maintenance of Rs. 5,133 per month to the wife.Additional Sessions Judge Sanjay Sharma of Tis Hazari Courts observed that the husband cannot shirk his responsibility regarding interim maintenance...
Observing that mere fact that the husband is unemployed would not absolve him from his responsibility to maintain his wife, a Delhi Court has upheld an order awarding a meagre amount of interim maintenance of Rs. 5,133 per month to the wife.
Additional Sessions Judge Sanjay Sharma of Tis Hazari Courts observed that the husband cannot shirk his responsibility regarding interim maintenance towards the wife by pleading unemployment.
"The fact that the appellant is unemployed would not absolve him from his responsibility to maintain the complainant. The appellant has requisite educational and professional qualification for earning. Termination of service does not mean that the appellant is incapable of finding another employment or work," it observed.
The husband had preferred a criminal appeal under Section 29 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in a complaint case wherein the Mahila Court had directed him to pay interim maintenance to the respondent wife from the date of filing of petition till its final disposal.
The wife had alleged that she was subjected to physical and mental cruelty for bringing insufficient dowry, followed by allegations and counter-allegations against each other. Finally, she left the shared household on October 7, 2013.
The case of the wife was that husband was earning more than Rs. 50,000 per month and was living a luxurious life.
On the other hand, the husband stated that he was employed with a studio, earning Rs. 6,000 per month. He stated that he was unemployed and that he had no source of income. He further averred that he was bearing domestic expenses and looking after his old ailing father and that the wife was earning more than him from stitching work.
Perusing the impugned order, the Court said:
"The complainant is wife of the appellant. It is trite to state that it is the moral and legal obligation of the appellant to maintain his wife and provide her same comforts commensurate to his status and standard of living."
The Court was of the view that husband was a graduate and an experienced photographer which was also mentioned in the additional reply filed by him.
"The complainant has done 12th standard. She is not employed. She has no source of income. She has no movable or immovable property capable of generating any income. She is residing with her parents. She is dependent upon her parents. A mere statement that the complainant is earning from stitching work in the absence of any credible material in this regard is inconsequential. She is entitled to seek maintenance from the appellant," the Judge added.
The Court also observed that the husband had requisite educational and professional qualification for earning and that termination of service does not mean that he was incapable of finding another employment or work.
"The appellant is a graduate. He is able-bodied and experienced photographer. He is residing in ancestral home in a posh colony of Delhi. He is not suffering from any physical disability preventing him from doing any work. He cannot shrink his responsibility regarding interim maintenance towards the complainant by pleading unemployment since 02.09.2016," the Court said.
Accordingly, dismissing the appeal, the Court upheld by noting that there was no reason to interfere with the impugned order and that there was no manifest error of law or procedure or perversity in the same.
Case Title: Pawan Deep Singh vs. Jaspreet Kaur