Non-payment of maintenance is economic abuse, constituting domestic violence: Kerala HC

Non-payment of maintenance is economic abuse, constituting domestic violence: Kerala HC

The non-payment of maintenance by itself is an economic abuse, which constitutes domestic violence, according to the Kerala High Court.It held that claims of victims of domestic violence need no independent corroboration as usually the harassment happens inside the confines of a house.Accordingly, the court dismissed a plea challenging an order of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Chittur, directing a man to pay ₹10,000 as maintenance to his wife and child.The court found no reason to interfere with the Magistrate’s order, which was upheld by the District Court, Palakkad. The man challenged the order before the High Court alleging that the maintenance amount was excessive, and that his wife had been employed as a teacher in a private college. He further denied the alleged incidents of domestic violence as unbelievable, without independent corroboration.Justice Jobin Sebastian, who considered the case, noted that the woman had approached the Magistrate complaining of several acts of ill-treatment and harassment by her husband. She said she was forced to leave the house with her child due to the abuse and had been living separately for a year, during which time the man had not paid the maintenance.She informed the court that the amount awarded was sufficient to meet the expenses of herself and her child.The High Court found that there was no reason to disbelieve the allegations of domestic violence since the woman had categorically deposed before the Magistrate that she was subjected to mental and physical cruelty by her husband within their matrimonial home. She claimed that he had misappropriated her gold ornaments and used them for his business purposes.The court held that the fact that she had worked in a private college for a short period on a nominal salary was not a reason to deny the relief of maintenance in her favour. It observed that the maintenance amount awarded was ‘just and fair’, and that the man was an able-bodied person, bound to provide sufficient maintenance to ensure a dignified life for his wife and child. Published - July 28, 2026 11:33 pm IST

Original Source

Read the full article at Thehindu →

KhanList aggregates and links to publicly available news content. We do not host full articles from third-party sources. Always verify important information with original sources.