The Delhi High Court has said that a woman cannot be refused interim maintenance just because she is educated or had a job earlier. If she left her job to take care of a young child, she still has the right to get financial support. This decision was made by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma while hearing a case where a husband challenged the Family Court’s order asking him to pay interim maintenance to his separated wife.

The husband argued in court that his wife is well-educated and used to working as a school teacher, earning around ₹40,000 to ₹45,000 per month, including tuition income.However, the wife told the court that she cannot work right now because she is the only one taking care of their young son. She said that her past job should not be a reason to deny her maintenance.

Her lawyer also explained that she had to leave her teaching job because of the long travel time and the lack of nearby job options. Since she doesn’t have any family support, she couldn't manage both her job and raising the child on her own. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma said that the wife’s reasons for leaving her job were fair and understandable. Thejudge noted that when a parent has full custody of a young child, they often cannot take up full-time work, especially if there is no family support to help with childcare. In such situations, stopping work should not be seen as a choice, but as something the parent is forced to do because taking care of the child is their top priority.

The court referred to a 2021 Supreme Court judgment in Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr., which said that if a qualified woman leaves her job to care for her family, this must be taken into account when deciding on maintenance.The court also pointed out that the wife had earlier worked as a guest teacher but had to quit because it was too difficult to handle both her job and her child’s care alone.

The Delhi High Court said the Family Court was right to grant maintenance only after the wife left her job and to consider the husband’s estimated income as a lawyer. Although the Family Court didn’t check the husband’s bank statements or income affidavit, the High Court found no legal error. It stressed that maintenance should be based on the wife’s actual income at the time, not her potential to earn, as also held in a Supreme Court ruling.

The High Court sent the case back to the Family Court, asking it to look at the wife’s request for interim maintenance again. This is because the husband’s income documents were not considered earlier. The Family Court has been told to check both sides’ income details and give a clear decision within one month.

Till then, the husband must keep paying ₹7,500 per month to his wife and ₹4,500 per month for their child. These payments must be made by the 10th of each month and can be adjusted later based on the final order. With this, the High Court closed the case.