The Delhi High Court of India’s national capital New Delhi has denied interim maintenance to a woman holding a master’s degree from the University of Wollongong, Australia, underscoring that well-educated individuals with prior work experience should not remain unemployed solely to claim alimony from their spouses.
The petitioner, who married in December 2019 and relocated to Singapore with her husband, returned to India in February 2021, alleging cruelty by her spouse and in-laws.
However, the evidence presented revealed her extensive qualifications, as she had previously worked as an Audit Associate at KPMG in Dubai and later as a Human Resources Manager in her father’s business. She also ventured into entrepreneurship by importing semi-precious jewellery. Despite her qualifications and experience, she sought interim maintenance from her estranged husband, asserting unemployment.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, presiding over the case, remarked,
“A well-educated wife, with experience in a suitable gainful job, ought not to remain idle solely to gain maintenance from her husband.”
He stressed that Section 125 of the CrPC aims to ensure equality among spouses and provide protection, not to promote idleness.
An aspect of the case was the examination of a WhatsApp conversation between the petitioner and her mother. In this exchange, the mother advised her daughter against seeking employment, suggesting that doing so could jeopardise her alimony claims.
While the authenticity of this conversation is subject to verification during the trial, the court regarded it as prima facie evidence indicating a deliberate choice to remain unemployed to strengthen the maintenance claim. The timing of this discussion, occurring before the maintenance petition was filed, further implied an intentional strategy to remain jobless to bolster her case.
The court concluded that the petitioner had not provided evidence of efforts to secure employment or resume her business activities.
“The mere assertion of job-seeking, without corroborative evidence, is insufficient to establish genuine efforts at self-sufficiency.”
Consequently, the court upheld the family court’s earlier decision, denying interim maintenance to the petitioner.
This judgment underscores the judiciary’s stance that individuals with substantial qualifications and work experience are expected to seek employment actively and not rely solely on spousal support. It also highlights the importance of genuine efforts toward self-sufficiency in maintenance cases.
This ruling sets a precedent, emphasising that individuals with substantial education and work experience, such as degrees from esteemed institutions like the University of Wollongong, Australia, should utilise their skills for self-reliance instead of depending on spousal support.
Support Our Journalism
Global Indian Diaspora and Australia’s multicultural communities need fair, non-hyphenated, and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. The Australia Today – with exceptional reporters, columnists, and editors – is doing just that. Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.
Whether you live in Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, the United States of America, or India you can take a paid subscription by clicking
