Woman doesn’t lose right to live according to her choices in marriage: HC

Bombay HC upholds order for a chartered accountant to pay maintenance to estranged wife and daughter, emphasizing a woman's right to live according to her choices in a marriage.

MUMBAI: A woman has every right to live according to her choices in a marriage and no person has a right to dictate the way she should lead her life, said the Bombay high court (HC) recently while upholding an order of a sessions court, instructing a city-based chartered accountant to pay ₹65,000 per month to his estranged wife and minor daughter, towards their maintenance and house rent.

HT Image

A single judge bench of justice Sharmila Deshmukh made the observations in the context of a woman’s allegation that she was embarrassed by her father-in-law when she was going for an outing along with her female friend. She wanted to wear a knee-length dress, but her husband suggested she should wear a saree over her dress while leaving the house to avoid confrontation with his parents.

The 39-year-old woman, accordingly, wrapped a saree around her dress, but her father-in-law noticed and humiliated her in the presence of her friend and other family members by asking her to take off the saree and reveal what she was wearing inside.

“In a marriage, a woman does not lose the right to live her life according to her choices and no person has a right to dictate the way the woman should lead her life,” said justice Deshmukh while stating that such humiliation and embarrassment caused to a married woman is the worst form of emotional abuse and would qualify to be a domestic violence as contemplated under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act, 2005.

“By remaining indifferent to such an act by his own father, the husband is equally guilty of said act,” said the court. “This act of remaining a passive spectator to the humiliation suffered by his wife would be nothing less than an emotional abuse of the worst form resulting in mental agony to the wife constituting domestic violence.”

The couple got married in March 2009 at Andheri Sports Complex and has a 13-year-old daughter born out of wedlock. However, soon after the birth of their daughter, disputes started cropping up between the spouses and eventually in April 2012, the woman left the matrimonial home along with their minor daughter.

She later filed a criminal case for matrimonial cruelty as well as proceedings under the DV Act. Acting on her plea, a metropolitan magistrate court had initially granted interim maintenance to the mother-daughter duo. In August 2019, the court ordered the husband to pay ₹65,000 per month to them towards maintenance and house rent.

The husband had approached the high court after the Dindoshi sessions court on September 17, 2022, rejected his appeal challenging the magistrate court order. The high court on Tuesday upheld the order.

Justice Deshmukh also dismissed a petition filed by the chartered accountant, challenging the magistrate court order, freezing an amount of ₹79.18 lakh from his bank account for recovery of the maintenance amounts as ordered to be paid in the DV proceedings.