In a significant judgment, Justice Dr. Kauser Edappagath of the Kerala High Court has ruled that a Muslim wife living separately from her husband due to his second marriage is entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The court clarified that a husband’s financial obligations to his second wife cannot diminish the statutory rights of the first wife and their children.
Case Background
The case arose from a revision petition filed against a Family Court decision awarding maintenance to the first wife and her two children. The Family Court had granted maintenance of ₹4,000 per month to the wife and ₹1,500 each to the children. Dissatisfied with the amount, the wife approached the High Court, seeking an enhancement based on her husband’s income and their needs.
The husband contested the claim, stating that his income was limited as he was working in a bakery after returning from abroad. He argued that his financial obligations towards his second wife and personal health issues left him incapable of paying higher maintenance.
Important Legal Issues
1. Entitlement to Maintenance: Whether a Muslim wife residing separately due to her husband’s second marriage loses her right to claim maintenance.
2. Impact of Personal Law: The extent to which Muslim personal law can influence statutory maintenance rights under Section 125 CrPC.
3. Proof of Income: Whether the husband provided sufficient evidence of his financial constraints to justify reduced maintenance.
Key Observations by the Court
Justice Dr. Kauser Edappagath addressed these issues and made the following observations:
– Entitlement to Maintenance: The court reaffirmed that a Muslim wife living separately due to her husband’s second marriage is entitled to maintenance. Citing precedents like Badruddin v Aisha Begum (1957), the court emphasized, “A Muslim wife who resides separately from her husband on his contracting a second marriage is not disentitled from claiming her statutory right of maintenance under CrPC.”
– Obligations Despite Second Marriage: The court rejected the argument that the husband’s responsibilities towards his second wife could reduce his obligations towards the first wife. It noted, “The fact that the husband has a second wife and is liable to maintain her cannot be a factor in denying maintenance to the first wife or reducing the quantum of maintenance she is entitled to.”
– Burden of Proof on Income: The court held that the onus to prove financial incapacity lies with the husband. It stated, “An able-bodied husband must be presumed to be capable of earning sufficient money to maintain his wife and children.” The husband’s failure to produce evidence regarding his income and health issues led the court to draw an adverse inference against him.
Decision of the Court
After analyzing the evidence and arguments, the Kerala High Court enhanced the maintenance amount. The wife was awarded ₹8,000 per month, and each child was awarded ₹3,000 per month, reflecting the respondent’s presumed earning capacity and the petitioners’ needs.
This judgment reinforces that a husband’s obligations under Section 125 CrPC cannot be mitigated by personal law or other commitments. It highlights the court’s commitment to ensuring the financial security of women and children, particularly in the context of polygamous marriages.
