The Madhya Pradesh High Court clarified that a wife can be denied maintenance based on adultery only if she is proven to be living in adultery at or around the time of the maintenance application.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has set a significant precedent regarding the conditions under which a wife may be entitled to maintenance from her husband, particularly in cases involving allegations of adultery. This detailed analysis follows the court’s decision, which has implications for how adultery impacts maintenance rulings under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
Also Read- “PIL Is Sacred”: Bombay HC Dismisses Plea For CBI Probe Against BMC Officers (lawchakra.in)
Justice Prakash Chandra Gupta presided over the case, which centered around a husband’s challenge to a family court order that required him to pay Rs. 10,000 per month in maintenance to his estranged wife. The husband’s appeal was rooted in allegations of adultery, which he claimed disqualified his wife from receiving maintenance under Section 125(4) of the CrPC.
The legal framework under Section 125(4) of the CrPC stipulates that a wife is not entitled to maintenance if she is “living in adultery.” However, Justice Gupta clarified,
“It is apparent that the adultery u/S 125(4) of Cr.P.C. has to be continuous and the liability to prove the same is upon the husband in order to debar wife from getting maintenance. The wife can be debarred from getting maintenance on the ground of ‘adultery’ only when she is actually ‘living in adultery’ at or around the time of application for maintenance under S. 125 of Cr.P.C.”
The case brought to light the complexities involved in proving adultery within the context of maintenance proceedings. The husband had presented photographs as evidence of the alleged affair yet failed to provide the necessary electronic certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act to authenticate these images. The High Court noted this deficiency, stating,
“The Court emphasized that without such a certificate, it cannot be conclusively inferred from the photographs alone that the wife had engaged in adultery with another man.”
Furthermore, the court examined the broader allegations and circumstances, including the wife’s claims of dowry harassment and physical abuse, which led to her living separately from her husband. Contrary to the husband’s assertions, the court found that he had not provided sufficient evidence to prove continuous adultery on the part of his wife.
The judgment underscores a crucial legal principle: the burden of proof lies with the individual alleging adultery, and such allegations must be substantiated with clear and continuous evidence to impact maintenance decisions.
“The law mandates that to extract the provision under Section 125(4) of the CrPC, the husband has to establish with definite evidence that the wife has been living in adultery, and one or occasion acts of adultery committed in isolation would not amount to ‘living in adultery’,” the court explained.
In conclusion, the Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the family court’s decision, affirming the wife’s entitlement to maintenance. This ruling highlights the judiciary’s careful approach to allegations of adultery in maintenance cases, emphasizing the need for concrete evidence and the continuous nature of the alleged behavior.
This landmark decision not only clarifies the legal standards for disentitling a spouse to maintenance on the grounds of adultery but also reinforces the importance of substantiated claims in marital disputes. The judgment serves as a critical reference for future cases, ensuring that maintenance rulings are based on solid evidence and legal principles rather than unfounded allegations.
READ ORDER
Also Read- Gujarat High Court Directs To Prevent Lion Deaths On Railway Tracks (lawchakra.in)