The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that a husband cannot deny maintenance by alleging adultery when the divorce was granted on the ground of cruelty. The Court also enhanced the minor daughter’s maintenance, considering education and living expenses.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
MADHYA PRADESH: The Madhya Pradesh High Court, Indore Bench, has ruled that a husband cannot deny maintenance to his wife on allegations of adultery if the divorce decree was granted on the ground of cruelty and not adultery. The Court dismissed the husband’s revision petition and enhanced the maintenance awarded to the minor daughter from ₹5,000 to ₹15,000 per month.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Gajendra Singh, who made significant observations on parental responsibility and the economic burden of child upbringing.
Highlights of the Judgment
- Adultery cannot be used to deny maintenance under Section 125 CrPC if the divorce was granted on the ground of cruelty.
- Maintenance awarded to the wife was upheld.
- Maintenance for the minor daughter was enhanced, considering educational and living expenses.
- Father has a greater economic responsibility when the mother is the primary caregiver.
Case Background
The parties were married on December 14, 2008, as per Hindu rites. A daughter was born on July 27, 2010. Due to matrimonial disputes, the wife applied Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, on July 10, 2021, alleging neglect and inability to maintain herself and her daughter.
She claimed:
- The husband was working as a creative director in graphic design, earning approximately ₹60,000 per month.
- He also earned ₹7,000 per month from rental income.
- She sought ₹30,000 per month as maintenance.
Meanwhile, the Family Court, Indore, granted a divorce decree on June 16, 2021, dissolving the marriage on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Husband’s Contentions
The husband opposed the maintenance claim, arguing that:
- The wife was living in an adulterous relationship.
- She earned ₹15,000 per month working at a beauty parlour.
- His own income was only ₹46,000 per month.
- He had financial responsibilities toward his aged parents.
On June 24, 2025, the Family Court awarded ₹7,000 per month to the wife and ₹5,000 per month to the minor daughter.
Both parties filed criminal revision petitions before the High Court.
High Court’s Analysis
Adultery Not a Ground to Deny Maintenance
Justice Gajendra Singh examined the divorce decree and noted that the marriage was dissolved solely on the ground of cruelty, not adultery.
The Court observed:
“The above decree of divorce has not been granted on the ground of adultery. Accordingly, the Family Court committed no illegality in rejecting the contention in this regard.”
Thus, precedents barring maintenance due to adultery were held inapplicable.
Maintenance for the Wife
The Court found:
- No sufficient grounds to enhance the wife’s maintenance.
- No justification to reduce or cancel the maintenance already granted.
Accordingly, the ₹7,000 per month maintenance for the wife was upheld.
Enhanced Maintenance for the Minor Daughter
Taking a strong view on child welfare, the Court emphasized that:
- The daughter, born in 2010, is studying in the 9th standard at a public school in Indore.
- The mother is the primary caregiver.
- The father never sought custody of the child.
Justice Singh made a notable observation:
“Mother is investing her valuable time for taking care of the daughter and the respondent is investing that time for pleasure of his personal life. Accordingly, the father has the duty to bear the economic expenses required for the daughter’s education and upbringing.”
The Court noted that ₹5,000 per month was inadequate considering the high cost of living and education in Indore city.
Final Decision
- Husband’s revision petition dismissed
- Wife’s maintenance of ₹7,000 per month upheld
- Minor daughter’s maintenance enhanced from ₹5,000 to ₹15,000 per month
- Enhanced maintenance payable from the date of application (June 10, 2021)
Case Title:
VIKAS NAIK Versus SMT. VAISHALI AND OTHERS
CRIMINAL REVISION No. 3343 of 2025
READ ORDER
Click Here to Read More Reports on Maintenance
