The Madras High Court recently ruled that a bedridden senior citizen husband can’t be burdened with paying maintenance to his wife, citing his financial constraints and serious medical ailments.
Key Highlights: –
Maintenance provisions aren’t punitive: The court emphasized that maintenance laws are meant to prevent destitution, not punish spouses. Justice L. Victoria Gowri noted that Section 125 CrPC can’t be used to overburden an aged and medically incapacitated spouse.
Husband’s financial capacity: The court considered the husband’s pension and retirement benefits, concluding that his income was insufficient to pay additional maintenance. The husband, a 65-year-old paralysis patient, required Rs. 5,000 monthly for medical care.
Wife’s ability to sustain herself: The court found that the wife was capable of maintaining herself, citing her ability to sustain herself with available support.
Senior citizens’ rights: The court highlighted the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, emphasizing that senior citizens have a statutory right to maintenance from their children. The court noted that the husband’s children had neglected him despite his medical needs.
In conclusion, this ruling highlights the court’s focus on balancing spouses’ obligations while protecting senior citizens’ welfare. The Madras High Court’s ruling underscores that maintenance provisions are meant to prevent destitution, not punish spouses. By relieving the bedridden senior citizen husband of his wife’s maintenance, the court prioritized his medical needs and financial capacity, ensuring a balanced approach to spousal obligations.
