Expecting Educated and Earning Wife to Contribute to Household Expenses is Not Cruelty
- INTRODUCTION
The concept of “cruelty” under matrimonial law has often been interpreted broadly by Indian courts. It extends beyond physical violence and includes mental cruelty or conduct that makes it impossible for one spouse to continue living with the other. However, not every disagreement or financial expectation within a marriage falls within this definition. A recent judicial pronouncement clarified that expecting an educated and earning wife to contribute to household expenses cannot automatically be treated as cruelty. - LEGAL BACKGROUND
Over the years, courts have evolved tests to assess whether certain conduct amounts to cruelty, emphasizing that it must cause such hardship or mental agony that it becomes intolerable for the aggrieved spouse to continue marital life.In many petitions, wives have argued that being asked to share expenses or contribute financially amounts to cruelty. However, the judiciary has taken a balanced approach, noting that marriage is a partnership and financial responsibilities should be shared in line with the spouses’ capacities. - JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION
The courts have recognized that where the wife is educated, employed, and earning a substantial income, it is not unfair for the husband to expect her to bear a part of the financial responsibilities of the household. This expectation, by itself, does not amount to cruelty unless accompanied by harassment, coercion, or unreasonable demands.For instance, in K. Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa, the Supreme Court emphasized that cruelty must be determined on the facts of each case and cannot be presumed merely because of financial disagreements. Similarly, in Samar Ghosh v. Jaya Ghosh, the Court outlined illustrative instances of mental cruelty but made it clear that normal wear and tear of married life should not be mischaracterized as cruelty.Thus, if both spouses are working professionals, courts expect them to adjust and share the economic burdens of family life. Labelling such sharing as cruelty would dilute the essence of marriage as a cooperative relationship. - SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE
The evolving role of women in society has significantly altered expectations within marriage. With more women attaining higher education and professional careers, the notion of one-sided financial responsibility on the husband has been steadily declining. Treating a husband’s expectation of contribution from an educated wife as cruelty would be inconsistent with the principles of equality and partnership that modern marriage embodies.Moreover, equating such expectations with cruelty risks trivializing genuine cases of abuse and harassment. Courts have therefore insisted that allegations of cruelty must be backed by substantial evidence of ill-treatment or unreasonable conduct, not merely ordinary expectations of financial contribution. - CONCLUSION
Cruelty, as a ground for divorce, must be understood in its true spirit: it refers to conduct that is grave, serious, and destructive to marital harmony. A husband’s expectation that his educated and earning wife should share household expenses is neither unjust nor cruel. Instead, it reflects the principle of partnership in marriage. Courts have rightly clarified that unless such expectations cross into coercion or harassment, they cannot be treated as cruelty under matrimonial law.This article has been researched and written by Advocate Aarun Chanda, practicing divorce law in Mumbai and Pune. This article is intended solely for academic purposes and should not be construed as legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult a qualified lawyer/advocate specializing in divorce cases for professional legal guidance. - Seeking expert legal guidance?- Contact The Divorce Law Firm today.
