Supreme Court rules alimony should not be used for extortion

The Supreme Court on Thursday issued a crucial reminder that laws designed to protect women should not be misused to harass or extort husbands.

The court emphasized that alimony is meant to provide the dependent spouse with a reasonable standard of living, not to equalize financial disparities between former partners.

The judgment came in the context of a high-profile case involving tech professional Atul Subhas, who claimed that his estranged wife and her family had demanded a monthly maintenance of Rs 2 lakh, later increasing it to Rs 3 crore annually.

A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Pankaj Mitha, while dissolving the marriage on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown, directed the husband to pay Rs 12 crore as a full and final alimony settlement. The court stressed that maintenance should not be used as a tool for coercion or exploitation.

"The women need to be careful about the fact that these strict provisions of law in their hands are beneficial legislation for their welfare and not means to chastise, threaten, domineer or extort from their husbands," the bench remarked.

The wife had claimed her husband’s net worth exceeded Rs 5,000 crore, with businesses and properties in both the US and India, and that he had paid his first wife at least Rs 500 crore during their separation, excluding a house in Virginia.

The court highlighted the importance of a balanced approach, considering not just the income of the husband, but also the wife’s income, reasonable needs, and residential rights.

"We have serious reservations with the tendency of parties seeking maintenance or alimony as an equalisation of wealth with the other party. It is often seen that parties in their application for maintenance or alimony highlight the assets, status and income of their spouse, and then ask for an amount that can equal their wealth to that of the spouse," the court stated.

The bench further asked, "We wonder, would the wife be willing to seek equalisation of wealth with the husband if due to some unfortunate events post-separation, he has been rendered a pauper?"

The court also addressed concerns over the misuse of criminal complaints, noting instances where wives and their families use such complaints as leverage to pressure husbands and their families for financial demands.

The Supreme Court quashed the criminal cases filed by the wife against her estranged husband, sending a clear message about the need for fair and just use of legal provisions.