The Bombay High Court ruled that denying intimacy and making false accusations against a husband amounts to cruelty, upholding a family court order that granted divorce after the couple lived apart for over a decade.
The Chhattisgarh High Court held that a husband cannot demand his wife’s call records or private details, ruling that marriage does not override the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a wife living separately from her husband without a valid reason is not entitled to maintenance under Section 125(4) CrPC, setting aside a family court’s order and directing a fresh hearing.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a wife cannot be denied maintenance merely for being educated or qualified unless it is proven she left her job only to seek support. The Court upheld the family court’s decision granting ₹15,000 monthly maintenance.
The Supreme Court removed a Jharkhand High Court condition requiring a husband to pay ₹9 lakh as interim compensation while granting anticipatory bail under Section 498A IPC. However, the Court allowed an increase in the husband’s monthly maintenance from ₹4,000 to ₹10,000.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that a husband can pay money instead of offering a room in the shared house to his wife. The Court said this alternative is practical and legally valid under the Domestic Violence Act.
The Bombay High Court has ruled that a man cannot escape his responsibility to pay maintenance to his estranged wife and children, even if he is facing financial difficulties. The court said this is both a moral and legal duty.
A Mumbai court rejected a dentist wife’s request for ₹1 lakh monthly maintenance from her husband, stating she can work. However, the husband must pay ₹20,000 per month for their children.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a wife cannot be denied maintenance simply because she is qualified, unless it is proven that she quit her job just to claim maintenance.
