The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that a wife’s love affair with someone else is not sufficient to prove adultery and deny her maintenance.
As reported by LiveLaw, the Court stated that sexual intercourse is a necessary component for adultery to be established.
“From Section 144(5) of the BNSS/125(4) of the Cr.P.C. it is clear that only if the wife is proved to be living in adultery, then the maintenance amount can be denied. Adultery necessary means sexual intercourse. Even if a wife is having a love and affection towards somebody else without any physical relations, then that by itself cannot be sufficient to hold that the wife is living in adultery,” held Justice G.S. Ahluwalia, as reported by LiveLaw.
What was the case?
The revisionist-husband approached the High Court challenging the order of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chhindwara (M.P.), which had granted interim maintenance of Rs. 4,000 to the respondent-wife.
The husband argued that he was earning only Rs. 8,000 and the wife was already receiving Rs. 4,000 as interim maintenance under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
He further claimed that the wife was involved in a love affair and that his father had deprived him of his ancestral property, LiveLaw reported.
Here’s what Court held
The Court upheld the Trial Court’s decision to award Rs. 4,000 in maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, noting that it had already considered the interim maintenance granted under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
Even if a wife is having a love and affection towards somebody else without any physical relations, then that by itself cannot be sufficient to hold that the wife is living in adultery.
The Court found no illegality in the order and emphasized that the husband was an able-bodied person.
Additionally, the Court noted that the husband’s family had committed fraud against the wife at the time of marriage and dismissed the revision, as reported by LiveLaw.
