A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice P.V. Varale, while adjudicating a divorce case and deciding on alimony, directed courts nationwide to consider the following factors while determining permanent alimony:
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has introduced an eight-point guideline for determining alimony amounts amidst the ongoing debate surrounding the suicide of Bengaluru-based techie Atul Subhash.
A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice P.V. Varale, while adjudicating a divorce case and deciding on alimony, directed courts nationwide to consider the following factors while determining permanent alimony:
- Social and economic status of both spouses.
- Future basic needs of the wife and children.
- Qualifications and employment status of both parties.
- Sources of income and property ownership.
- Wife’s standard of living in her in-laws’ house.
- Whether the wife left her job to support the family.
- Reasonable legal expenses for a non-working wife.
- The husband’s financial status, earnings, and other responsibilities.
The court emphasized that these are not rigid rules but serve as guiding principles. It also noted that alimony should ensure a decent standard of living for the wife without penalizing the husband excessively.
Separately, a bench of Justices B.V. Nagarathna and N. Kotiswar Singh dismissed a dowry case, observing that such provisions are sometimes misused for personal vendettas. This aligns with the court’s previous concerns over the misuse of Section 498A of the IPC, which addresses cruelty by husbands and their families.
Brief Facts
Subhash’s case has reignited discussions on the alleged exploitation of dowry laws. In his suicide note, he repeatedly wrote, “Justice is Due,” and accused his wife’s family of extorting money.
Married in 2019 after meeting on a matchmaking website, the couple welcomed a son in 2020. Subhash alleged that his wife’s family demanded Rs 1 crore, later increasing it to Rs 3 crore, and that his wife left with their son in 2021 after he refused to pay further amounts.
The Supreme Court, while delivering its verdict in a divorce case, emphasized the need to allocate ₹1 crore for the maintenance and financial security of the couple’s adult son.
The couple, who lived together for six years before spending the subsequent 20 years apart, faced allegations of incompatibility and strained relations. Praveen accused Anju of being hypersensitive and indifferent towards his family, while Anju alleged Praveen’s behavior towards her was unacceptable. Their prolonged separation left no opportunity for fulfilling marital obligations, leading the court to conclude that their marriage had irretrievably broken down. Accordingly, the divorce was granted, along with specified conditions.
This decision coincides with public outrage over the recent suicide of Bengaluru-based techie Atul Subhash, who accused his estranged wife and in-laws of harassment.
Subhash, originally from Bihar, alleged harassment by his wife, Nikita Singhania, and her family, accusing them of filing multiple cases to extort money. Before taking his life, he recorded an 80-minute video and left a 24-page suicide note criticizing the justice system.
The note detailed Subhash’s prolonged legal battles, including disputes in a family court in Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh. It also highlighted Nikita’s demands for exorbitant maintenance payments and her conduct during court proceedings, reflecting years of emotional and legal turmoil faced by Subhash.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
