Working Wife’s Right to Maintenance Under Matrimonial Law: A Bombay High Court Perspective
1. INTRODUCTION
Under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a wife—even if earning—may claim maintenance from her husband. The core legal question often turns on whether her income suffices to maintain the standard of living she enjoyed during marriage.
2. CRITICAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES
The Supreme Court, in Pravin Kumar Jain v. Anju Jain, highlighted factors for quantifying maintenance: the parties’ status, reasonable needs, income (self and spouse), matrimonial standard of living, employment history, and sacrifices made during marriage.
IMPORTANTLY:
i) Maintenance is not punitive—rather, it is a means to ensure “reasonable and realistic” support that avoids oppression or push to penury.
ii) An earning wife may still be entitled to maintenance if her income is insufficient for her accustomed living standard.
3. BOMBAY HIGH COURT JUDGMENT:
WORKING WIFE ENTITLED TO MAINTENANCE
On June 18, 2025, Justice Manjusha Deshpande, hearing in SKPS vs PSS (Writ 16275 of 2023), dismissed the husband’s challenge to a Bandra Family Court order that awarded the wife interim maintenance of ₹15,000/month.
KEY OBSERVATIONS:
i) SUBSTANTIAL INCOME DISPARITY
The husband claimed ₹57,935 net monthly income; evidence showed a genuine salary exceeding ₹1 lakh.
The wife’s salary was modest (approx. ₹18,000–21,820/month), with minimal interest income from investments.
ii) INCOME INSUFFICIENCY DESPITE EMPLOYMENT
Though employed, the wife’s earnings did not cover commuting costs and basic living expenses; she was compelled to live with her parents/brother due to financial constraints.
iii)STANDARD OF LIVING PRINCIPLE
The Court affirmed that “merely because the wife is earning, she cannot be deprived of support … to maintain the same standard of living to which she was accustomed during the marriage”—a principle repeatedly emphasized.
iv)HUSBAND’S OBLIGATIONS
i) The court rejected the husband’s plea citing parental dependency, noting his father’s pension ∼of ₹28,000 and no concrete proof of financial responsibilities.
ii) The residual income after his obligations was comfortably covered the maintenance awarded.
4. BROADER JURISPRUDENCE
i) Multiple High Courts and the Supreme Court reiterated that an earning wife cannot be denied maintenance if her income fails to sustain her matrimonial living standard.
ii) Sessions Courts also confirm that a wife’s earning capacity does not absolve the husband’s duty to maintain her.
5. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS
I. FOR WIVES
i) Employment does not automatically extinguish entitlement to maintenance.
ii) She should demonstrate that her income does not adequately support travel, housing, and day-to-day living comparable to married life.
II. FOR HUSBANDS
i) Key defenses require credible evidence of their own financial liabilities and an accurate net income disclosure.
ii) Misrepresentation of income can have severe consequences, as demonstrated.
III. JUDICIAL APPROACH
i) Courts apply a balanced assessment, analyzing income disparity, living standards, genuine need, travel and housing costs, and preserving lifestyle.
ii) Both Supreme Court precedent and High Court rulings resist a blanket denial of maintenance purely on the grounds of the wife’s employment.
6. CONCLUSION
The Bombay High Court’s June 2025 ruling clarifies that working wives remain entitled to maintenance when:
i) Their own earnings fall short of sustaining their matrimonial standard of living.
ii) There is a discernible income disparity with the husband.
Even in interim maintenance hearings, the court will weigh actual incomes, expenses, and living standards, not merely the existence of a salary. This judgment reinforces a progressive legal interpretation: the right to maintenance aligns with dignity and equitable consideration, not penal consequences for independence.
This article has been researched and written by Advocate Aarun Chanda, who practices divorce law in Mumbai and Pune. It is intended solely for academic purposes and should not be construed as legal advice. Readers are encouraged to consult a qualified lawyer or advocate specializing in divorce cases for professional legal guidance.
Seeking expert legal guidance?- Contact The Divorce Law Firm today.
