The Supreme Court said, “Women need to be cautious that the stringent provisions in their hands are beneficial laws for their welfare and not a means to punish, intimidate, dominate or extort their husbands.”
The Supreme Court, while hearing a case on Thursday, commented on the alimony given by the husband after the divorce. The court expressed concern over the tendency to demand alimony equal to the financial status of the other party in matrimonial cases. The court said on Thursday, “While demanding alimony, a woman cannot expect alimony from her ex-husband according to her current standard of living.”
The court said, “The stringent provisions of the law are for the welfare of women and not to ‘punish, intimidate, dominate or extort’ their husbands.”
Justices BV Nagarathna and Pankaj Mithal said that Hindu marriage is considered a sacred institution, which is the foundation of the family, and not a ‘commercial venture’
‘The law is not meant to punish the husband…’
The bench hearing the case observed that the Supreme Court has on several occasions condemned the inclusion of IPC sections like rape, criminal intimidation and cruelty to a married woman in most of the complaints related to matrimonial disputes.
The bench said, “Women need to be cautious that the stringent provisions in their hands are beneficial laws for their welfare and not a tool to punish, intimidate, dominate or extort money from their husbands.”
The court made this remark when the bench dissolved the marriage between a separated couple on the ground that it could no longer be reconciled. The bench said, “The provisions in the criminal law are for the protection and empowerment of women, but sometimes some women use them for purposes for which they were never meant.”
How much alimony will the husband have to pay?
In the case, the husband was ordered to pay Rs 12 crore as permanent alimony to his estranged wife within a month as full and final settlement of all her claims.
However, the bench commented on cases where the wife and her family used the criminal complaint for these serious offences as a platform for negotiation and as a tool to coerce the husband and his family into meeting their demands.
The bench said the police sometimes rush to act in selective cases, arresting the husband and his relatives, including elderly and bed-ridden parents and grandparents, while trial courts refrain from granting bail to the accused because of the “gravity of the offence” in the FIR.
The Supreme Court said that a petition was filed by the wife seeking transfer of the divorce petition filed under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, pending in a Bhopal court, to a Pune court.
The husband had sought divorce under Article 142 (1) of the Constitution.
Why was the marriage not successful?
The court said that both the parties and their family members were embroiled in several litigations during the period of their marital relationship. The bench said that the marriage did not really progress as the separated couple did not live together continuously.
While dealing with the issue of alimony, the court said, “The wife has claimed that the estranged husband has total assets worth Rs 5,000 crore, which includes several businesses and properties in the US and India and that he had paid about Rs 500 crore to the first wife upon separation.
Objection of the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court expressed serious objection to the manner in which parties seeking maintenance or alimony treat each other’s assets as equal to the other party. “It is often seen that parties in their application for maintenance or alimony highlight the assets, status and income of their spouse and then seek an amount which is equal to the assets of their spouse,” the bench said.
The bench wondered whether the wife would be willing to demand equalisation of property if due to some unfortunate event he becomes penniless after separation? The bench said that fixing the alimony depends on many factors and there cannot be a simple formula.
Agreed on ₹8 crore
In the joint petition seeking dissolution of their marriage by a mutual divorce order, the husband had agreed to pay a sum of Rs 8 crore for final settlement of all claims.
The bench said, “The Family Court, Pune has assessed Rs 10 crore as permanent alimony to which the petitioner may be entitled. We accept the finding of the Family Court, Pune. An additional amount of Rs 2 crore should be paid to the petitioner so that she can purchase another flat.”
The Supreme Court also quashed the criminal cases filed by the wife against her estranged husband.
