DO INDIA’S MAINTENANCE LAWS REFLECT BIASE

Introduction

According to a study by the Economic Times, divorce rates in India have risen by 50–60% in recent years. This tendency may be caused by women's increased independence and rising understanding of fundamental human rights or education. For both the husband and the woman, divorce has serious emotional and financial repercussions. However, men bear a far greater financial burden than women do. Men are frequently blamed for handling asset division, alimony, and child support, which causes them to contribute more than half of their salary, placing a significant financial strain on them.

After a divorce, women's positions are frequently discussed, but men's experiences are rarely considered. The term "maintenance" describes the monetary assistance that one spouse gives to the other to guarantee that the dependent spouse may continue to live at a level comparable to that which they experienced throughout their marriage. Only the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 and the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act of 1936, out of all the statutes and legislation pertaining to marriage and maintenance in India, address the husband's right to maintenance from the wife following a divorce. Only the wife has the right to demand support under all other laws. A thorough examination may be found below.

How Is The Maintenance Amount Calculated

Alimony or maintenance is a sum that the competent spouse—who is often a man—is legally required to give to the unable spouse—who is typically a woman—in order to support her following a divorce or judicial separation. Interim and permanent maintenance are the two categories. Final maintenance is paid upon the final legal separation, whereas interim maintenance is paid throughout the court processes. The maintenance payment may be made in installments or as a one-time payment.

In the case of Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury, (1970) 3 SCC 129, the Supreme Court ruled that awarding 25% of the husband's net income as maintenance to the wife would be fair and appropriate. In India, maintenance is generally determined by considering factors such as the financial earnings of both spouses, their lifestyle, the number of dependents, and the expenses necessary for supporting dependent family members. It is essential to recognize that paying maintenance is a legal responsibility, and non-compliance can result in legal penalties, including fines or imprisonment.

Biased How?

Hindu marriage is traditionally regarded as sacred, with religious texts emphasizing the equality of husband and wife, describing their union as one where their souls are inseparable. However, marriage and divorce laws in India often appear to favor women.

Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, allows either spouse to seek maintenance post-divorce, making no distinction between husbands and wives. This ensures that a spouse unable to sustain themselves can claim maintenance from the financially capable partner. Similarly, Section 40 of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936, extends this right to both spouses in Parsi marriages. However, such gender-neutral provisions are absent in other legislation.

For instance, under Section 37 of the Divorce Act, 1869, which governs Christian marriages in India, only the wife can claim post-divorce maintenance from the husband, with no reciprocal right for husbands. Likewise, under Section 37 of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, only the wife is entitled to maintenance, provided she remains unmarried. In Muslim law, the right to claim maintenance is exclusively granted to the wife, with no such provision for the husband. Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, provides detailed guidelines for the maintenance of wives and children, allowing any woman, regardless of religion, to seek maintenance.

These legal provisions often appear discriminatory and unfavourable toward men. This bias can still a fear of divorce among men, as they risk losing a significant portion of their income and assets. Additionally, maintenance claims are sometimes misused by women as a means to harass their spouses, even when they are financially self-sufficient but choose not to work. Such practices may contribute to the rising divorce rates in India.

Analysis
Article 15 of the Indian Constitution prohibits discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth. Therefore, laws that grant only women the right to claim maintenance while denying the same right to men, even if they are unable to sustain themselves after divorce, violate this constitutional provision. The Constitution, being the supreme law of the land, ensures that the rights it guarantees are fundamental to the citizens' existence, and it is the State's duty to safeguard these rights.

This issue was raised in Vivek Bhatia v. Anju Bhatia, where the petitioner, a husband who had been granted a divorce on the grounds of mental and physical cruelty, was ordered to pay maintenance to his wife and minor son. After losing his job, he appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the validity of Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). He argued that his wife, being more qualified and capable of self-support, should not be entitled to maintenance. He contended that Section 125 of CrPC violates Article 15 and should be declared unconstitutional.

In, Kusum Sharma v. Mahinder Kumar Sharma, FAO 369/1996. the Delhi High Court emphasized that maintenance is not only a constitutional right but also a component of universal human rights. Human rights, as fundamental rights, are available to all individuals regardless of caste, class, or gender. This raises a critical question: why is the right to claim maintenance restricted to women and denied to men? Such gender-exclusive laws undermine the basic human rights of men. Even in cases where a wife is capable of working but chooses not to, the husband is still obligated to pay maintenance, highlighting the inherent bias in these legal provisions.

Conclusion

It is imperative to introduce necessary amendments to make these provisions gender-neutral. One approach is to revise existing laws to ensure that both husbands and wives have an equal right to claim maintenance. Article 15 of the Indian Constitution mandates equal treatment for all individuals without discrimination, and this principle should guide the enactment of gender-neutral legislation. Additionally, specific laws should be introduced to address men's marital rights and responsibilities. For instance, while women are afforded special rights such as the right to reside in the marital home, the right to streedhan, and the right to dissolve a marriage, comparable rights should also be extended to men.

When many of these Acts were originally framed, societal norms restricted women’s economic independence and property rights. However, in contemporary times, women are increasingly financially independent and possess inheritance rights. It is essential to update these laws. Acts such as the Hindu Marriage Act, of 1955, and the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, of 1936, already provide for maintenance claims by either spouse. Similarly, laws like the Divorce Act, of 1869, and the Special Marriage Act, of 1954, should be amended to grant husbands the right to claim maintenance under appropriate circumstances. These changes would ensure that legal provisions reflect the evolving needs of modern society.