The Allahabad High Court ruled on this wife she is not entitled to alimony if her actions or the actions of her relatives directly cause the husband’s inability to generate income. This decision sets a legal precedent for the intersection of domestic conduct and financial obligations.
This was the conclusion reached by the court when it rejected the petition for revision filed by the woman who sought financial support from her husbandpractitioner of homeopathy.
The husband’s earning potential was severely compromised after he was allegedly shot dead by his father-in-law and brother-in-law during a violent confrontation at his private clinic.
Justice Lakshmi Kant Shukla, presiding over the case, upheld the court’s earlier decision for the Kushinagar family. He noted that an award of maintenance in these particular circumstances would constitute a significant miscarriage of justice. This is especially true in the case where a man’s professional livelihood was destroyed by the criminal actions of the plaintiff’s closest family members.
“While Indian society generally expects the husband to work and support the family, this case presented unique circumstances,” Justice Shukla noted.
“It is well settled that although it is the pious duty of a husband to support his wife, no court has imposed any such express statutory duty upon the wife.”
The evidence adduced showed that Ved Prakash Singh sustained life-changing injuries during the attack, rendering him physically incapacitated. The High Court emphasized that the bullet remains embedded in his spinal cord. Surgical removal carries a serious risk of permanent paralysis.
As a result, he is unable to sit for long periods of time or maintain steady work.
“If a wife, by her own act or omission, causes or contributes to her husband’s inability to earn, she cannot be allowed to take advantage of such a situation to claim maintenance.”
“Awarding alimony under such circumstances would result in a serious injustice to the husband and the court cannot turn a blind eye to the reality of the record,” she added.
On May 7, 2025, the lower court denied the wife’s request for interim support. In its final assessment, the Supreme Court emphasized that the husband’s disability is an indisputable fact resulting from the actions of the wife’s relatives, which made it impossible for her to claim maintenance.
High qualification of wife cannot be ground for denial of maintenance: Allahabad HC
In a separate case, the Allahabad High Court recently held that a wife cannot be denied maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Code (CrPC) merely because she is highly qualified or has professional skills.
Justice Garima Prashad set aside a family court ruling rejecting a woman’s claim for maintenance from her husband, noting that “it is proper for a husband to rely solely on his wife’s qualifications to avoid his legal obligation to support her.”
The court stated that the wife’s mere earning potential is different from actual gainful activity.
