Wife In Love With Someone Else Without Any Physical Relations Is Not Adultery: Madhya Pradesh High Court

“From Section 144(5) of the BNSS/125(4) of the Cr.P.C. it is clear that only if the wife is proved to be living in adultery, then the maintenance amount can be denied. Adultery necessary means sexual intercourse. Even if a wife is having a love and affection towards somebody else without any physical relations, then that by itself cannot be sufficient to hold that the wife is living in adultery,” held Justice G.S. Ahluwalia.

Revisionist-husband approached the High Court against the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chhindwara (M.P.) awarding interim maintenance at Rs.4,000/- to the respondent-wife. It was pleaded that the revisionist was earning only Rs.8000 and the wife was already getting Rs. 4000 has interim maintenance in lieu of the order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.

It was further pleaded that the wife was having a love affair and that the applicant had been disposed of his ancestral property by his father.

The Court observed that the salary certificate filed by the revisionist did not have the date or place of issuance mentioned and could be relied on till it was verified by the Authorities.

The Court relied on Rajnesh Vs. Neha and Another, where the Supreme Court held that if a person is able bodied then less salary is not a “hurdle” for granting maintenance to the wife.

Noting that the revisionist had not contended that he was not a able bodied person, the Court observed that the respondent-wife in her dairy had specifically written that the family of revisionist had, at the time of marriage, claimed that they had a lot of land, but in reality they did not have any land. It was noted that the wife had also alleged cruelty in the diary. Observing that the husband was relying on the diary to make certain averment, the Court held that no formal proof of the same was required.

Holding that the wife's adultery was not proved by the husband, the Court proceeded to deal with the interim maintenance awarded to the wife.

The Court held that the Trial Court while awarding maintenance of Rs. 4000 under Section 125 CrPC had considered the award of interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, therefore, there was no illegality in the order. Holding that the husband is an able-bodied person and that the his family members played fraud on the wife at the time of marriage , the Court dismissed the revision.

Case Title: Amit Kumar Khodake v. Smt. Madhuri @ Anjali

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (MP) 38

Click here to Download/Read Order