⚖️ Background
In a significant ruling, the Orissa High Court addressed the issue of maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The case involved a husband challenging a Family Court order that directed him to pay ₹8,000 per month to his estranged wife. The husband argued that his wife was well-educated and previously employed, and therefore capable of earning her own livelihood
📚 Wife’s Profile
- Educational Qualification: Science graduate with a Post-Graduate Diploma in Journalism and Mass Communication
- Work Experience: Former employee at media houses
- Current Status: Unemployed at the time of the case
🧑⚖️ Court’s Observations Court’s Observations Court’s Observations Court’s Observations
Justice Satapathy made it clear that maintenance is meant for wives who are genuinely unable to support themselves, not for those who voluntarily remain unemployed despite having the qualifications and experience to earn.
The Court emphasized that the social objective of Section 125 CrPC is to provide financial support to those who truly need it. It must be balanced with the husband’s income and liabilities, as well as the wife’s potential to earn.
💰 Final Verdict
The High Court reduced the maintenance amount from ₹8,000 to ₹5,000 per month, acknowledging the wife’s ability to work and the husband's financial responsibilities, including caring for his dependent mother
📝 Key Takeaways
- Educated and employable wives cannot claim maintenance simply by choosing to remain unemployed.
- Courts will consider educational background, work experience, and earning potential when deciding maintenance.
- This judgment sets a precedent for fair and balanced maintenance rulings, ensuring that the provision is not misused.
