A woman can’t be deprived of financial support from estranged husband just because she’s earning: Bombay HC

Mumbai: Merely because a woman is earning does not deprive her of financial support from her estranged husband, as she has to maintain her standard of living, the Bombay High Court has ruled.

A bench of Justice Manjusha Deshpande in the order of June 18, a copy of which was made available on Thursday, said the wife deserves the same standard of living as she was accustomed to before their separation.

The court dismissed a petition filed by a man challenging an August 2023 family court order directing him to pay Rs 15,000 monthly maintenance to his wife.

The man said his wife was a working woman earning more than Rs 25,000 a month and hence did not require “high” maintenance from him.

The court in its order said that though the wife is earning, the income is not sufficient for her own maintenance since she has to commute a long distance daily for her job.

With such an income, she is not in a position to live a decent life, the HC said.

“Merely because the wife is earning, she cannot be deprived of support from her husband with the same standard of living to which she is accustomed in her matrimonial home," Justice Deshpande said.

The court noted that the man earns far more than the woman, with no financial responsibilities.

In his plea, the man claimed that his monthly earnings were not high enough to give his wife Rs 15,000 each month. As per the man, he also has to take care of his ailing parents.

The woman, however, refuted the man’s claims of financial instability. She said he earned over Rs 1 lakh per month.

The court in its order noted that the woman was presently living with her parents and brother, but could not continue doing so indefinitely as it might cause inconvenience and hardship to all of them.

The man’s parents are not dependent on him as his father gets a monthly pension of Rs 28,000, the court said.

There is a huge disparity in the income of the man and woman, which cannot be compared, the HC said, refusing to quash the family court order.