Abstract
Alimony is a type of spouse support paid by one ex-spouse to another after the marriage has been legally dissolved. The prime aim or goal of alimony is to provide financial assistance to a spouse who is supposed to be economically disadvantaged [typically to a wife by her husband], after a divorce. It can sometimes be perceived or used as a form of harassment against husband and his family, especially if the amount is deemed excessive and unjustified. Alimony is addressed under section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and under section 144(1) of Bhartiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with maintenance which mandates, “that individuals with sufficient means must provide maintenance for their wives, and if he neglects or refuse to do so without sufficient cause, the Magistrate can issue a warrant to recover the due amount as if it were a fine. Additionally, the Magistrate can sentence the individual for the non-payment, potentially for each month’s unpaid allowance”. Nowadays, as women in India are well-informed about their legal rights in respect of alimony or maintenance, demanding equality as men enjoy in every aspect of life. Therefore, why not women are asked to pay alimony to their husband when they are capable enough to maintain their husband? Therefore, it is high time to ask for equality in respect of paying maintenance.
Keywords
Alimony, Maintenance, Divorce, Harassment, Equality, feminist
Introduction
There is a famous tag about alimony that it’s ‘feminist’ and ‘against men’ and ‘not true equality’. The term alimony originates from the Latin word “Alimonia,” signifying sustenance. Alimony originated in the English ecclesiastical courts at a period when divorce was prohibited, allowing married couples to attain only formal separation. Notwithstanding the couples residing apart, the husband retained a continuous legal obligation to support his wife, since they were legally married. The lack of property rights for women during marriage led to the historical preference for giving alimony to the wife. Furthermore, since women were unable to find outside work, there was further justification for paying alimony to a wife.
In traditional Indian society, divorce was once considered a wise social ban. Marriage, deeply rooted in cultural and religious traditions, was viewed as a lifelong commitment, and the idea of dissolving such union was seen as a breach of societal norms. The social discrimination of divorce began to shift in the 20th century, driven by various factors including modernization, women’s empowerment, and legal reforms. The feminist movement played a crucial role in women’s transformation. Advocates for women’s rights argued for legal reforms that would provide women with greater autonomy and protection in marriage and divorce. The feminist movement, also referred to as the women’s movement, is a collection of political campaigns and social movements that advocate for radical and liberal reforms on women’s issues, which are the result of the inequality between men and women. These concerns include equal pay, maternity leave, sexual harassment, sexual violence, women’s suffrage, reproductive rights, and women’s liberation.
The legal framework for divorce in India has evolved significantly over the years. Numerous acts were ratified in which divorce as a right were recognized, to mention a few, The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, The Special Marriage Act, 1954, The Divorce Act, 1869 and so on. Subsequently, the concept of divorce has emerged in India.
In earlier times, it is assumed that women were unschooled due to which they were incapable, to secured an employment for themselves, and have no source of income. Thus, they were dependent on their family members or husband for financial assistance. However, in present time the position of women is shifted. This shift happens due to factors like increased education among women, enabling them to secure a good job which results in less to no dependency on their family members or husband. As they are guaranteed several constitutional rights under Indian Constitution,1950 namely, “right to education” enshrined under article 21A. which is also a fundamental right, “equal pay for equal work” derived from article 39(d), and so on. In view of the fact that the condition of women is improved in present time since it is assumed that women were utilizing their fundamental right guaranteed under article 21A which state “right to education” and 39(d) which state “equal pay for equal work”. Therefore, women were capable enough to meet their own needs. As the concept of alimony has been prevalent for years, these days, some women who are well- informed about their legal rights and are capable to meet their needs, still misuse this right to alimony for harassing their husband and his family. Women sought for right to alimony as a wealth not as a standard of living as its instance can be traced in a landmark case of Rinku Baheti v. Sandesh Sharda “The Supreme Court ruled that alimony is meant to ensure a basic standard of living for the wife, not to equalize wealth, and an ex-husband cannot be obligated to maintain her as per his improved financial status post-divorce.”
The purpose behind writing this research paper is that why is the husband always liable to pay alimony to wife? Even, when section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is gender-neutral. It allows either spouses- husband or wife to claim maintenance from other, provided that they are unable to support themselves. This provision is not limited to wives seeking maintenance from their husbands, but also allows husbands to seek maintenance from their wives, making it gender-neutral. Therefore, why not equality should also be applied equally to the spouse in respect of alimony even when well enacted legislation is gender-neutral. Why it is turned into a gender biased enactment when both have equality in opportunities and capacity to maintain themselves on their own earnings after divorce.
Research methodology
This research paper indicates doctrinal methodology and is completely based on secondary sources of information. Assessing various factors including financial resources, need of alimony, and earning capacities of both spouses as well as the standard of living enjoyed during the marriage. Therefore, why not wives are equally liable to pay alimony to their husband? It is based on secondary sources, mostly on different websites, case laws and legal text.
Review of Literature
Gabrielle Hartley said that “I have spent more than 20 years mediating divorce settlements, and I have represented both men and women. While we have seen women gain greater access to financial stability over the years, I can’t help but wonder whether the way we approach alimony is still somewhat antiquated”.
Elisabeth M. Landes stated in her article that most jurisdictions authorize alimony to either spouse under appropriate circumstances, alimony is almost exclusively awarded to wives.
In a journal it is stated that there are several instances when the spouses take undesirable advantages of the provision, to fulfil their greed. It has also been observed that the laws in India are still women-centric and tend to aim at the men in society when there are more instances of wives harassing husbands for alimony and maintenance.
When it comes to alimony, the law is blind to gender. “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, that’s how family law works,” said Laura Wasser, the California lawyer representing singer Kelly Clarkson in her high-profile divorce. The phrase “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander” means that the same rule should apply to everyone, regardless of gender.
The Supreme Court of India recognized in the seminal decision of Deepak vs. Anita (2012), that a husband may request maintenance under Section 24 of the HMA provided he can provide proof of his financial dependency and the wife’s capacity to provide for him. This ruling established a standard for acknowledging the husband’s entitlement to alimony under particular conditions.
The aforementioned case is a strong -evidence which demonstrates the fair structure of law which is from time to time ratified by the legislature and interpreted by the court according to the circumstances of the case to render justice. But there are certain circumstances where some women overshadow the rights of men and use this right inadequately.
Contemporaneously, in 1979, a Supreme Court decision required gender neutrality in marital property division and alimony settlements as a matter of equal protection (Melli, 1996; Orr v. Orr, 440 U.S. 268). Nearly 40 years later, alimony is still predominately awarded to women. In 2013, approximately 344,000 women and 22,000 men were receiving alimony in the U.S. (Crowley, 2016).
In virtue of landmark case of “Atul Subhash case”, Atul Subhash who lived in Bengaluru and employed as software engineer in IT company died by suicide on 9 December 2024. Originally from Uttar Pradesh, Subhash and his estranged wife, Nikita Singhania, were embroiled in a divorce and custody battle. After being married in 2019, the pair had a four-year-old son together after living apart for three years. Atul accused his wife in a 24-page letter and an 81-minute video tape that he left behind. In these documents, he expressed his concerns and grievances regarding his divorce and custody case. His wife was demanded an irrational amount [Rs 5 crore] as alimony, which he refused to fulfill and demanded a fair amount to be paid in respect of alimony to his wife and son. She alleges on him as well as on his family. Besides the mental harassment suffered by him, a bribe was also demanded by the justice [Rita Kaushik] for settling down the case that illustrates how not only he was mentally harassed but also his right to fair trial was exploited. Consequently, “Atul, a sensible man took his life by drape”.
Noting some of the legal provisions, landmark judgement and opinion of well-known scholars above, it can be concluded that right to alimony was frequently misused by some women in order to harass the men and his family to take unjust benefit of the legislature.
Alimony: as shield or weapon
Financial safety: While section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which deals with permanent alimony and maintenance. The provision allows the court to order either spouse to pay maintenance to the other, either as a lump sum or a recurring payment, at the time of passing a divorce decree or at any time thereafter. Thus, according to section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, alimony functioned as shield for both husband and wives
Abuse of power: Sadly, some people [typically the wives] might consider alimony as a source to make money. They might purposefully postpone going back to work in order to receive a larger compensation. Hence, the Karnataka Case is strong -evidence where a woman sought ₹6.16 lakh per month in alimony, including ₹4-5 lakh for medical bills and physiotherapy, and ₹1.1 lakh for basic necessities and food. Thus, shows irrational demand.
Since, the concept of alimony was established to secure financial assistance for wives [previously] and now for husbands. It was enacted so that the weaker party may maintain their standard of living. Therefore, if the concept of alimony is used in good faith it may act as a shield by securing standard of living for those spouses who are unable to maintain themselves after the decree of divorce has been passed. On the other hand, some time it is used as a weapon of harassment to one party by another if used in bad faith
Alimony vs Maintenance
Alimony and maintenance both the terms are often used interchangeably, but they can have different meanings depending on the jurisdiction.
For the first time the term alimony was introduced inside law under section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, which states ‘permanent alimony and maintenance’ while the term permanent alimony disclosed that alimony, referred as a type of spousal support provided by one spouse to another after divorce for financial assistance. It is basically a one-time lump sum amount paid to the spouse who is facing difficulty in maintaining their standard of living as they had during the marriage.
On the other hand, maintenance refers to ongoing financial assistance either during or after the marriage on a monthly basis. It includes interim payment during divorce proceedings and permanent support after separation.
| Basis | Alimony | Maintenance |
| Timing | Awarded after the divorce decree. | Can be awarded during the marriage, during separation, or after divorce. |
| Payment Structure | Typically, a one-time lump sum payment. | Generally monthly or periodic payments. |
| Duration | Usually awarded as a final settlement post-divorce. | Continues until the financial needs of the dependent spouse or children are met, or until a substantial change in circumstances. |
| Eligibility | Awarded only to a spouse, often the dependent one. | Continues until the financial needs of the dependent spouse or children are met, or until a substantial change in circumstances. |
| Legal Provision | Governed by specific personal laws (e.g., Hindu Marriage Act). | Provided under both personal laws and secular laws (e.g., CrPC, DV Act). |
| Form | It can be awarded in the form of cash as well as property. | It is awarded in the form of cash only. |
Key difference between alimony and maintenance
Legal provision of alimony and maintenance
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: In section 24 of the act talks about interim maintenance whereas section 25 talks about permanent alimony. In interim maintenance either spouse can claim maintenance during the pendency of divorce proceedings. Whereas in permanent alimony a spouse may be granted financial support after divorce, based on income and standard of living.
Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956: Section 18 provides for maintenance of a wife even without divorce under certain circumstances such as desertion or cruelty.
Muslim women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986: Section 3 of the act mandates maintenance payment to divorced Muslim wives during the iddat period (post-divorce waiting period). Muslim personal law also provides for the payment of Mehr, a sum promised to the wife at the time of marriage, which is considered part of her financial security.
Special Marriage Act, 1954: Section 36 and 37 allows either spouse to seek maintenance and alimony, similar to Hindu Law
Criminal Code Procedure, 1973/Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Section 125 of code or section 144 of BNSS also ensures maintenance for wives, children, and parents across all religion.
The Supreme Court’s rulings, including those in the Shah Bano case and subsequent interpretations, have significantly strengthened the rights of Muslim women to maintenance after divorce, ensuring they are not left destitute. While the 1986 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act aimed to clarify maintenance provisions, subsequent court decisions have emphasized that Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) provides a secular and overarching framework for maintenance, applicable to all women, including Muslim women, regardless of religious personal laws.
How is alimony calculated in India?
In India alimony is governed by personal laws of the individual getting a divorce and also under the special marriages act. Indian citizens can avail two types of alimony:
- Temporary alimony: When the amount payable only for a fixed amount of time and the decision of this depends on the duration of the marriage and the financial conditions of both spouses at the time of the divorce.
- Permanent alimony: Permanent alimony is a court-ordered payment that one spouse must make to the other for an indefinite period of time.
In India it is not really hard to set rules on how much money needs to be paid by either spouse. But the calculation goes something like this.
If alimony is being paid in the form of monthly payments, then 25% of the monthly salary should be granted to the wives. If they decide on a permanent settlement it ranges between one-fifth and one-third of the husband’s one-year salary. When the alimony is filed it is based on the net worth of the spouses. When the calculation for alimony is made these are the factors that come into play-
- Monthly income of spouses
- Children from marriage
- Reasonable wants of the claimer
Landmark judgement of Supreme court on maintenance and alimony
In Sau Jiya vs Kuldeep, After four years of courtship, the parties got married in 2012. However, in 2014 the husband filed a case under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 on the premise of cruelty and desertion. He claimed that shortly after the marriage, his father had a heart condition that necessitated him to be in the hospital for around 15 days. During this time, he was unable to spend enough time with his wife, which caused her to be distressed and unhappy.
She left for her maternal home and exhibited reluctance to return despite several attempts as she did not want to cohabit with him in a joint family. The husband stated the parties stayed together for about only two months. The spouse accused his family members of cruelty by threatening to bring malicious and false criminal charges against them. The husband further argued that the wife implied during cross-examination that he had an extramarital affair with his friend’s wife, which would be mentally harmful to him in and of itself would constitute as mental cruelty.
The family court, in 2017 dissolved the marriage on the ground of cruelty, which held that even though a continuous separation of two years was not established and the ground of desertion could not be proven.
The wife challenged the decree before the Bombay high court, resulting in fresh examination of the matter. High Court, in 2018 levied false and baseless allegations of fraud against husband and his family members.
Later the matter reached supreme court. The bench said it was not inclined to interfere with the decree of divorce granted by the family court and confirmed by the high court. It’s evident that the existing dispute between the parties remains only concerning the maintenance amount as both parties agree for divorce. The court also considered the fact that the husband had already remarried, and he and his first wife had stayed together only for two months after marriage.
On the issue of alimony, the wife claimed the husband’s total earnings were more than 1.30 lakh per month and had two houses. On the other hand, husband claimed that wife earned more than Rs 2 lakh from a unisex salon. On the question of alimony, SC relied upon Rajnesh vs Neha [2021], and was also detailed in the recent case of Kiran Jyoti [2024].
The bench found out that the husband had not been honest in disclosure of his income and was clearly attempting to escape his liability to support his first wife. And has income of Rs 1.3 lakh per month.
The financial situation of both parties, including the husband’s second marriage, was taken into account by the court. The court did clarify, though, that these obligations do not release him from providing for his ex-wife.
The ruling stressed that such orders act as a deterrent against attempts to avoid financial obligations following a divorce and mandated that Rs 10 lakh be paid within three months.
Crux of the story is that even though the wife left her marital house willingly and without any reasonable reason, still entitled to alimony.
Suggestion
- Societal acceptance– In India alimony as a right is provided to husbands as well, but it is not so much recognized in society. Hence the right to alimony of the husband must be accepted by society.
- Punishment– There must be punishment for those who misuse this right of alimony and put false allegations on their spouse. Like in case of non- payment of alimony.
- Promote Gender Neutrality– Judges must interpret law based on gender neutrality and be gender biased.
Conclusion
It is seen that law enacted by parliament regarding alimony protected both the spouses. These laws were passed over 30 years ago and at that time the women were totally dependent over her family or her husband for financial support. Over time we have seen that marriages have evolved, the gender roles have changed as well. We can see how more women have joined the workforce so that has impacted the proportion of alimony amount. The act passed in 1955 was initiated with a view of ensuring right to alimony to both husbands and wives. Since the participation of women has also been increased in workforce but still the right of alimony to husbands is negligent. Moreover, the right of alimony is considered as a women’s right.
Since the legislation was intended to protect both the parties to marriage but the customs and societal norms left it as a right to wives only. Therefore, it is the right time to make society and change our mind-set that the right to alimony is not only limited to wives but also it is a right to husbands who are unable to maintain himself. This will also result in achieving the purpose of the Hindu Marriage Act.
As the women are getting protection and equality in every way, why not make them duty-bound to pay maintenance to their husbands who are unable to secure a living for themselves when the wives are earning a good salary.
References
- Alimony vs Maintenance in India, LawBhoomi (May 21, 2025), https://lawbhoomi.com/alimony-vs-maintenance/ (last visited June 19, 2025).
- Sharma, Alxic, Evolution of Divorce in India: From Social Taboo to Legal Reality, LinkedIn Pulse (May 2025)
- Kanu Bhati, The Paradox of Alimony for Men, Deccan Herald (Nov. 1, 2021), https://www.deccanherald.com/opinion/the-paradox-of-alimony-for-men-1046188.html.
- Historical Background of Alimony, LawShelf Educational Media, https://www.lawshelf.com/coursewarecontentview/historical-background-of-alimony (last visited June 19, 2025).
- Patricia A. Ross, The Limits of Physicalism, 66 Philosophy of Science 94 (1999), https://doi.org/10.1086/392678.
- The Indian Journal of Law and Public Policy, Volume 10, Issue 46, available on HeinOnline.
Author
Kumud Mittal
Shri Ramswaroop Memorial University Lucknow [225003]
college