Wife will get maintenance allowance even after husband’s death, Allahabad HC fixed the responsibility

In an important decision, the Allahabad High Court has rejected the appeal of the husband seeking permission to file a case of perjury (parjari) against the wife. During this, the court clarified that the responsibility of maintaining the wife rests on the husband and this responsibility does not end even after his death. The court said that if the husband dies, the wife can also demand maintenance from her father-in-law’s property.

Hearing on Akul Rastogi’s petition

This decision was given by the division bench of Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Satyaveer Singh while hearing the petition of Akul Rastogi. The petitioner had challenged the order of the Family Court, in which permission to prosecute his wife for allegedly giving false statements was refused. The High Court upheld the decision of the Family Court and rejected the appeal at the initial stage itself.

During the hearing of the case, it was argued on behalf of the husband that his wife misrepresented many facts in the maintenance claim. The allegation was that the wife described herself as a housewife, while she was working. Apart from this, he also did not provide correct information about his financial position and created confusion about the amount deposited in his bank accounts.

However, the court did not consider these arguments sufficient. The court said that no concrete evidence was presented that the wife was employed. Mere allegation does not prove that he has lied. At the same time, the court also made it clear that by accepting only one part of a document, the rest cannot be ignored, rather it is necessary to look at the entire document as a whole.

What did the court say?

On the issue of Fixed Deposit (FDR) also, the court said that this amount was deposited by the wife’s father and after marriage the father is not responsible to maintain her. At present the wife has limited funds left, which makes it clear that she needs financial assistance for her survival.

The court also said that under the law the husband’s responsibility to maintain his wife is paramount. If the husband dies then this responsibility may fall on other members of the family, especially the father-in-law. In the end, the court said that there are no solid grounds in the appeal to prove that the wife has knowingly given false statements. Therefore, it is appropriate to dismiss the appeal.