Providing for Wife and Child is a Husband’s Legal Duty, Says Pune Court

Despite the wife earning ₹42,000 per month, the court noted that this amount is not sufficient for her to raise a child and maintain a dignified life.
Family Court, Pune
Family Court, PuneGoogle Maps: Adv Angad Manwatkar
Published on

Pune: In a significant ruling, the Pune court has reaffirmed that providing financial support to a wife and child is a husband's legal, moral, and constitutional duty. The court ordered a husband to pay ₹20,000 per month as maintenance to his wife and child in a domestic violence case.

Court’s Observations

Despite the wife earning ₹42,000 per month, the court noted that this amount is not sufficient for her to raise a child and maintain a dignified life. Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC) Amol Shinde emphasized that the maintenance amount must be reasonable and aligned with the wife’s standard of living.

Family Court, Pune
Pune: Family Court Grants Divorce, Orders Repayment of Marriage Expenses to Wife

Furthermore, the court issued restraining orders against the husband, preventing him from:

  • Committing any form of violence

  • Entering the wife’s workplace

  • Making any contact with her

  • Seizing her property, including her ‘Streedhan’ (women’s rightful possessions)

Family Court, Pune
Family Court Waives Waiting Period for Couple Living Apart for Six Years

Case Background

The wife filed a domestic violence complaint against her husband and mother-in-law under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Through her lawyers, Advocates Prasad Nikam, Mansoor Tamboli, and Shubham Bobde, she sought maintenance support from her husband.

The couple was married in December 2020 and has a young son. The husband is a mechanical engineer with a monthly salary of ₹72,000, while the wife is an electronics engineer earning ₹42,000 per month. Due to daily expenses, childcare costs, and loan installments, the wife argued that her monthly financial requirement is ₹45,000, justifying her demand for maintenance.

Legal Arguments and Court’s Ruling

The husband opposed the maintenance claim, stating that his wife is financially independent with a stable income. However, Advocate Prasad Nikam countered this argument by citing legal precedents, emphasizing that even a working woman is entitled to maintenance if her earnings are insufficient to maintain her standard of living.

Nikam further argued that many women sacrifice their careers for their families, and the maintenance amount must be fair to ensure the wife can live with dignity. After considering these arguments, the court ruled in favor of the wife, ordering the husband to pay ₹20,000 per month as maintenance.

Help Us Create the Content You Love

Take Survey Now!

Enjoyed reading The Bridge Chronicle?
Your support motivates us to do better. Follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Whatsapp to stay updated with the latest stories.
You can also read on the go with our Android and iOS mobile app.

Related Stories

No stories found.
logo
The Bridge Chronicle
www.thebridgechronicle.com