HT DIGITAL
GUWAHATI, JUNE 6: In a landmark judgment, the Gauhati High Court ruled to support a woman’s right to be separated from her husband while validating her right to get maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The ruling was made after hearing a case in which she was accused of domestic violence and undue suspicion about the paternity of the couple’s child.
The court recognized that the woman had valid reasons to exit the matrimonial home. Some of the fundamental issues included the husband’s unfounded suspicion regarding their child’s light complexion, as both parents had darker complexions. The suspicion intensified into physical harassment, culminating in the husband compelling his wife and child out of the house.
Related Posts:
Overseeing the case, Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia said, “The wife and the husband both had dark complexions, but their child is fair in complexion. That’s why there was a fight between the wife and the husband. The husband began physically intimidating the wife and expelled her along with the child from the matrimonial home.
The court battle commenced with the Trial Court directing a monthly maintenance of ₹2,500 to the wife and ₹500 to the child. The husband appealed against the order in the Sessions Court, which granted maintenance to the child but denied it to the wife on grounds of inconsistencies in her statement. The Sessions Court also faulted the Trial Court’s presumption that a woman would not leave her matrimonial home unless for just cause, deeming this line of reasoning to be legally unsound.
Appealing the Sessions Court’s ruling, the woman, aided by Advocate AK Hussain, appealed the case to the High Court. Hussain argued that Section 125 CrPC, as a social legislative provision aimed at protecting the rights of wedded women, cannot be made subject to the stringent standards of proof customary in civil proceedings.
The High Court, after considering the evidence and facts, held that the suspicion of the husband regarding the complexion of the child, combined with successive instances of physical assault, were reasonable grounds for the wife to reside separately. The bench held that this abuse and suspicion were enough to qualify the wife’s claim for maintenance. Consequently, the ruling of the Sessions Court was reversed by the Gauhati High Court, and the initial Trial Court order was restored, awarding maintenance to the wife as well as the child.
