The Gujarat High Court held that an LLB qualification cannot be used to deny a divorced woman her right to maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC. The Court stressed that education alone cannot negate financial dependence entirely.
The Gujarat High Court stated that an LLB education cannot be a reason to deny a divorced wife her maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Justice Hasmukh D. Suthar dismissed Phruti Vinubhai Dodiya’s request to raise her monthly maintenance from Rs 10,000 to Rs 25,000.
He upheld the Family Court’s ruling, stressing that a husband must support his ex-wife regardless of whether she is qualified or has remarried.
From a Love Marriage to Separation Phruti and her husband married by choice on December 29, 2008, in Asarva, Ahmedabad, following Hindu customs. Their relationship reportedly declined within six months due to claims of dowry harassment, cruelty, and the husband’s alcohol problem.
The husband, who worked as a professional singer, also faced accusations related to family issues. By December 2013, the couple began living apart in rented housing, although conflicts continued.
Eventually, Phruti moved back to her parents, and they finalized their divorce on May 26, 2016. The Maintenance Claim After Divorce After the divorce, without any financial support, Phruti went to the Family Court and filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 2787 of 2016 under Section 125 CrPC.
The court granted her interim maintenance of Rs 2,000 per month, which reportedly went unpaid. This led to enforcement actions, including recovery proceedings and even orders for the husband’s imprisonment. On January 11, 2022, the Family Court set the maintenance at Rs 10,000 per month.
Phruti contested this amount, seeking an increase, while the husband also filed a revision (Criminal Revision No. 319 of 2022), which was dismissed on February 1, 2023.
The Maintenance Was Too Low Phruti argued that Rs 10,000 was far too low. She highlighted her health needs and pointed out that her husband earned significantly from performances and international engagements.
During cross-examination, she emphasized that her husband had a substantial income, with evidence showing foreign travel and event contracts. She also insisted that her LLB degree and work as an advocate did not remove her right to maintenance.
Limited Income and Additional Responsibilities The husband claimed his income was modest, at about Rs 200 to 250 per day from singing. He mentioned that he remarried after the divorce and had a son, so he requested consideration of his responsibilities to his new family.
The Family Court assessed his ability to pay using an “able-bodied” approach and estimated his income at around Rs 30,000 to 33,000 per month, despite his lack of documentation. The court then awarded Phruti maintenance of about one-third of this estimated income.
Court’s Reasoning: Duty to Support Cannot Be Avoided Justice Suthar reviewed the case, relying on guidance from the Supreme Court, especially Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena (2015 (6) SCC 353).
This case established that husbands cannot escape maintenance responsibilities, which are both legal and moral. The High Court also cited limitations from Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander (2012 (9) SCC 460), noting that intervention is appropriate only where there is a clear error.
The court clarified that Phruti, as a divorced wife entitled to maintenance under this social welfare law, cannot have her claim denied just because she holds an LLB qualification.
Key Observations From the Bench stated,
“Just because the applicant has an LLB degree cannot be a reason to deny maintenance, and the Family Court has considered this aspect.”
The Court remarked,
“It remains the husband’s duty to support his wife and provide for her and their children; he cannot avoid his responsibilities as a husband and father.The Family Judge estimated his income at Rs 33,000 per month and awarded Rs 10,000 per month for maintenance, which seems fair, as it amounts to roughly one-third of his income.”
The Court Added,
“There is no evidence to indicate that the Family Judge made an error in assessing the husband’s income at Rs 30,000 to Rs 33,000 per month.”
No Increase, But Future Modification Possible Ultimately, the revision was dismissed, and the monthly maintenance of Rs 10,000 was upheld. The judgment in R/CR.RA/616/2022 was dated April 6, 2026.
However, the court noted that maintenance could be reconsidered in the future if circumstances change. It referenced the chance for modification applications under Section 127 CrPC, reminding that divorced wives’ rights to maintenance are enforceable. Courts will look at the full financial and family situation of both parties rather than relying solely on qualifications.
Case Title: DHRUTI VINUBHAI DODIYA vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR