Considering the rise of Art divorce cases in india and the recent alimony debate after Bangalore techie Atul Subhash died by suicide, the Supreme Court (SC) said the country’s strict laws are meant for the welfare of women and therefore should not be used to extort money from their husbands. During the divorce proceedings, the SC said that laws do not prohibit “punishing, threatening, dominating or extorting” men and therefore women should be careful.
The SC also noted that in most matrimonial disputes, women accuse their husbands of rape, criminal intimidation and cruelty, and it has become like a “combined package”. Commenting on this, the bench observed, “Women should be careful that these strict provisions of the law in their hands are beneficial laws for their welfare and not means of punishment, threats, power or extortion from their husbands.” It went on to say: “Criminal law provisions are designed to protect and empower women, but some misuse them for purposes for which they were never intended.”
Judge B. V. Nagaratna and Pankaj Mittal further commented that Hindu marriage is sacred and not a “commercial enterprise”. The court also said that in many cases women and their families abuse the strict laws to force the husband and his family to pay or agree to their demands. Sometimes the police also jump to conclusions and arrest not only the husband but also his family members, even the elderly, and courts refrain from granting bail in FIRs of such serious crimes.
“The collective effect of this chain of events is often forgotten. Even minor disputes between husband and wife turn into ugly battles for ego and reputation, airing of dirty linen in public places and impossible reconciliation or cohabitation,” the judge noted.
Such comments were made by the court during the hearing of the matrimonial dispute. He was annulling the marriage between a man and his wife, who was unable to contact them on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown.
An estranged wife has sought an equal share in her ex-husband’s wealth as she claimed her husband’s net worth is INR 5,000 crore with businesses and properties in India and the US. She also claimed that he had paid INR 500 crore to his first wife, excluding the house in the US, and therefore should also get an equal share of his wealth. However, the court ordered the man to pay INR 12 crore as the full and final settlement amount within a month.
Commenting on the fact that a wife cannot claim alimony to match her ex-husband’s current wealth, the court said, as reported by the Hindustan Times: “A husband cannot be expected to maintain [his wife] according to his current status for life. If the husband has moved on and is fortunately doing better in life after the separation, then asking him to always maintain his wife’s status in line with his own changing status will be a burden on his personal progress.’
What do you think about the recent SC pronouncements on divorce and maintenance in India? Tell us in the comments section below.
