Character Assassination Without Evidence is Adequate Reason for Wife to Live Separately: Orissa High Court
Pranav B Prem
The Orissa High Court recently ruled that baseless allegations against a wife's character provide sufficient grounds for her to live separately and claim maintenance under Section 125(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Justice Gourishankar Satapathy emphasized that a wife's chastity is a "priceless possession" and doubting it without evidence justifies her refusal to cohabit with her husband.
Case Background
The case involved a couple married in May 2021 who began living separately just a few months later. The wife filed a maintenance petition under Section 125 of CrPC, alleging that her husband had cast aspersions on her character. The Family Court, Baripada, awarded her monthly maintenance of ₹3,000, which the husband challenged through a revision petition.
In his defense, the husband argued that his wife left him without sufficient cause and claimed the maintenance amount was excessive, given his income as a skilled laborer earning ₹9,000 per month. The wife, however, maintained that the unfounded allegations against her character compelled her to leave her marital home.
Court’s Observations
Justice Satapathy underscored that a wife's chastity is integral to her dignity, and any baseless doubts cast by a husband undermine the sanctity of the marital bond. The Court noted that the husband, during cross-examination, suggested the wife had an extramarital affair with one Motilal Mohanta, but he failed to produce any evidence to support these claims.
The judgment observed, "When the character of a wife is doubted by her husband without proof, she has enough reason to live separately. Baseless character assassination itself is a valid ground for a wife to refuse to live with her husband." The Court further remarked that a wife's refusal to cohabit under such circumstances does not disqualify her from receiving maintenance.
Quantum of Maintenance
Addressing the husband's objection to the maintenance amount, the Court noted that the ₹3,000 monthly maintenance granted by the Family Court was proportionate to his income. It stated that a wife is entitled to a standard of living commensurate with her husband's means. Given his monthly income of ₹9,000, the Court found no merit in his claim that the maintenance amount was excessive.
Verdict
Upholding the Family Court's decision, the Orissa High Court dismissed the husband's revision petition and reiterated the principle that unfounded character accusations against a wife violate her dignity and justify her living separately.
Cause Title: ABC v. XYZ
Case No: RPFAM No.9 of 2024
Date: January-09-2025
Bench: Justice G. Satapathy
[Read/Download order]
