The Allahabad High Court has ruled that a husband cannot avoid paying maintenance to his first wife just because he says he does not earn enough, especially if he is able to support a second wife. The court said that a husband’s financial condition cannot be used as an excuse to deny maintenance to his legally married wife.

Justice Harvir Singh passed this order while dismissing a petition filed by Mohammad Asif. Asif had challenged a maintenance order passed by the Aligarh Family Court, which directed him to pay Rs 20,000 every month to his first wife. The High Court refused to interfere with the family court’s decision.

According to the case, Mohammad Asif works as a labourer at a hardware store in Bengaluru. He told the court that his income was very low and that it was not possible for him to pay Rs 20,000 per month. He claimed that the amount fixed by the family court was too high and beyond his financial capacity.

Asif’s lawyer argued that the family court had ignored an income certificate issued by a Revenue Officer in November 2018. This certificate stated that Asif’s annual income was around Rs 83,000 and was valid for five years. The lawyer also pointed out that the family court had earlier ordered Asif to pay only Rs 2,000 per month as interim maintenance, which was later increased to Rs 20,000. According to the petitioner, this sudden increase was unfair and not supported by proper evidence.

However, the lawyer representing Asif’s wife told the court that Asif had married another woman after separating from his first wife. This fact was also mentioned in the family court’s June 6 order. The wife’s lawyer further stated that the hardware store where Asif works is owned by his father. Both Asif and his father are taxpayers, and the store is registered under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) system. This, the lawyer argued, showed that Asif’s financial condition was better than what he claimed.

The wife’s lawyer also said that the first wife is unemployed and has no source of income. She is completely dependent on her parents for her daily needs. The lawyer argued that if Asif can take care of his second wife, he cannot refuse to support his first wife.

The High Court agreed with this argument and referred to an earlier Supreme Court judgment, which clearly states that a husband’s responsibility to maintain his wife does not end simply because he claims financial difficulty. The court said that a legally married wife has the right to maintenance, especially when she is living separately and depends on others for survival.