The wife had challenged the Sessions Court’s decision, which denied her maintenance on grounds that her testimony was “self-contradictory” and lacked credible evidence.
Gauhati: The Gauhati High Court upheld a wife’s right to maintenance, observing that she had “sufficient reason” to live separately from her husband, who physically harassed her for giving birth to a fair-complexioned child—despite both parents being dark-complexioned.
The Court was hearing a Criminal Petition filed by the wife under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), challenging the Sessions Court’s order that had denied her maintenance. The Sessions Court had only allowed maintenance for the child, rejecting the wife’s claim.
Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia, while deciding the case, made it clear that the wife had valid grounds to live away from her husband.
He noted:
“This Court is of the opinion that the petitioner had shown sufficient reason to live separately from her husband. The learned trial court has passed a reasoned judgment, which did not require any interference by a superior court.”
Background
The wife had filed an application under Section 125 of CrPC before the Magistrate, seeking maintenance. The Magistrate granted maintenance to both the wife and the child. However, the husband was unhappy with the ruling and filed a revision petition before the Sessions Court.
ALSO READ: Gauhati HC Rejects Assam MP’s Appeal Against Revocation of ST Status
The Sessions Court, while upholding the child’s maintenance, denied maintenance to the wife. It stated that her testimony was contradictory and not reliable.
The Sessions Court held:
“The wife’s evidence was self-contradictory and went against her pleadings, rendering her testimony wholly unreliable.”
The court further observed that while the wife admitted to staying away from her husband, she could not prove she had a justifiable reason for doing so.
It added:
“She had not been able to show that there was any sufficient cause for living separately.”
Additionally, the Sessions Court rejected the trial court’s reasoning that women generally do not leave their matrimonial homes without cause, observing:
“No woman would leave her matrimonial home without any reason was not a presumption permitted by law.”
ALSO READ: [Custodial Death Case] Gauhati HC Issues Notice to Assam Government in Dhing Rape Case
The wife then approached the Gauhati High Court through a Criminal Petition under Section 482 of CrPC. The High Court carefully reviewed the matter and sided with the trial court, stating that the wife had indeed given sufficient grounds for staying away from her husband.
The petitioner-wife was represented by Advocate A.K. Hussain, while Advocate S. Alom appeared for the respondent-husband.
Case Title: X v. Y
