RAJESH vs. SUNITA
Name of the judge - Justice H.S. Madaan
Facts
In the present case, the family court sentenced Mr. Rajesh, the husband to undergo civil imprisonment of one year because of his inability of non-payment of maintenance of Rs 91,000/- to his wife.
He and his wife, Mrs. Sunita got married and solemnized their marriage, but soon the relationship got strained and the wife filed for judicial separation and maintenance.
The family court ordered Mr. Rajesh for a maintenance of Rs. 6000/- per month to his wife, but he failed to do so and when the family court ordered for his imprisonment for 12 months, he appealed to the Punjab and Haryana High court, where he contended that he should be sentenced only for a month and not more than that.
Judgment
His appeal was rejected by the court. The High Court relied on the Supreme Court’s verdict in the case Shantha v. B.G. Shivnanjappa, where it observed that “Sentencing a person to jail is a ‘mode of enforcement’ and not a ‘mode of satisfaction’ of the liability. The liability will only be satisfied and end when the payment is made. Sending a person to jail doesn’t finish his/her liability to pay.
So, the order passed by the family court was uphold and it was said that the husband had to pay the maintenance to his wife.
Justice H.S. Madaan also said the most controversial statement while giving the judgment for the present case, which raised many questions and gave way to debates. He said -
“The first and foremost duty of the husband is to maintain the wife and the child. He may beg, borrow or steal.”
My opinion
This is not the first time that a judge has made a controversial statement regarding the husband’s duty to maintain his wife and children.
Justice G Rajasuriya said that the husband cannot claim that he is poor and cannot maintain his wife and children.
“A husband has to take care of his wife somehow or other even if he is jobless”.
But is it really fair to always expect the husband to earn handsomely? No one wants to be poor and earn less, but in our country unemployment or seasonal unemployment is a real issue. In a household, where both the spouses can earn and maintain themselves, then to put an unnecessary burden on the husband is really not fair. And judges giving out orders to husbands to maintain his wife ‘by hook or by crook’ really doesn’t give out a positive message.
Judges must take into consideration the earning capacity and monthly salaries of husbands and wives both, before giving the judgment and must order maintenance fairly.
