A Delhi court has reprimanded a person in a case of domestic violence. Besides, the decision of the lower court has also been overturned. The court has directed the man to provide monthly maintenance of Rs 6,000 to his son. Also said that a husband cannot escape his legal responsibility towards his wife and minor child by claiming to be unemployed.
Additional Sessions Judge Sheetal Chaudhary Pradhan was hearing the appeal of a woman. The woman had challenged the order of the lower court in which she was refused financial assistance under the ‘Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (PWDV) Act’. The judge accepted the woman’s appeal.
In its order dated June 2, the court said, “It is the responsibility of the defendant, the husband, to manage his expenses. He cannot absolve himself of the responsibility of maintaining his legally married wife and minor son merely by citing unemployment or other responsibilities.” The court found that the husband was capable of bearing the maintenance expenses and ordered him to pay ₹6,000 every month for the maintenance of the child till he attains majority.
Married in 2013 and separated in 2015
The woman had alleged that she got married in February 2013, after which her husband and in-laws harassed her for dowry. She claimed that she was thrown out of her in-laws’ house while she was pregnant and has been living separately with her son since 2015. According to court records, the couple started living together again for some time after a settlement was reached in the family court in 2015. They lived in a rented house for a few months but later separated again.
The woman’s complaint was rejected
In September 2025, the trial court had dismissed the woman’s complaint under the Domestic Violence Act. The court said that she failed to prove the allegations of domestic violence and economic exploitation. Although the appellate court acknowledged that the allegations of physical assault and cruelty were not proved by medical records or independent evidence, it found that the husband had not provided any financial support for the maintenance of the child since 2015. The court said, “The defendant (husband) is equally responsible for the maintenance of the minor child.”
Pay the expenses till the minor son attains majority
The court also noted that the child has been in the custody of the mother for many years and during this period no financial help was provided by the father. The court said, “In my opinion, the respondent/husband is capable of paying maintenance expenses of ₹6,000 per month, commencing from the date of this order, till his minor son attains majority (18 years of age).”
Leave a Reply