In a recent ruling, the Chhattisgarh High Court stated that a wife living with a man after leaving her husband is not entitled to maintenance from the husband. The court said this while dismissing a review petition filed by a woman seeking higher maintenance from her ex-husband. The high court on 9th May, not only denied the petitioner’s demand for higher maintenance but also quashed the one previously granted by the family court.

The decision came on review petitions filed by a computer operator from Raipur and his wife who in their respective pleas challenged a family court order passed in 2024, which stated that the ex-husband will provide Rs 4,000 monthly maintenance to his ex-wife.

However, the man challenged the court order arguing that his now-divorced wife was found doing adultery with his younger brother and the same was proven before the lower court. The man thus argued that a wife living in adultery cannot claim maintenance. He also told the court that his financial condition was not taken into consideration while pronouncing the verdict in ex-wife’s favour.

Meanwhile, the woman in her plea sought to increase the maintenance amount to Rs 20,000 per month.

The duo got married in July 2019, however, the woman claimed that soon after their marriage, the husband began inflicting mental torture and questioned her character. She further alleged that her in-laws used to torment her for not providing meals for the family on time.

Meanwhile, the man accused his wife of lying about his income as the woman claimed that her ex-husband earns Rs 1 lakh a month from various sources, Rs 25,000 from his job, Rs 35,000 in rent, and Rs 40,000 from farming. However, the man told the court that he only earns Rs 17,131 and had no other source of income.

The woman’s counsel argued that there is a difference between “living in adultery” and “once lived in adultery” or “Once established physical relation with someone twice or thrice”. The woman also contended that having an extra-marital affair and living an adulterous life are two different things.

However, the man argued that in 2023, the family court granted divorce to the duo under the Hindu Marriage Act on the grounds of adultery.

 The man’s counsel argued that under Section 125(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a woman is not entitled to receive interim maintenance from her husband if she was living in adultery, refuses to live with her husband without a sufficient reason, or if they are living separately by mutual consent.

After hearing the arguments of both sides, Justice Arvind Kumar Verma set aside the family court order and said: “The decree for divorce granted by the family court in favour of the husband is sufficient proof that the wife was living in adultery. Once such a decree is in force, it is not possible for this court to take a different view contrary to the decree granted by the civil court.”