Gauhati High Court Upholds Maintenance For Wife Harassed By Husband For Giving Birth To Fair-Complexioned Child When Parents Are Dark-Complexioned
Upholding maintenance awarded to a wife, the Gauhati High Court held that she had sufficient reason to stay away from her husband, who physically harassed her for having a fair-complexioned child, given that both parents are dark-complexioned.
The Court allowed the Criminal Petition filed by the wife under Section 482 of the CrPC challenging the decision of the Sessions Court, which refused to grant maintenance to the wife.
A Single Bench of Justice Parthivjyoti Saikia remarked, “This Court is of the opinion that the petitioner had shown sufficient reason to live separately from her husband. The learned trial court has passed a reasoned judgment, which did not require any interference by a superior court.”
Advocate AK Hussain appeared for the Petitioner, while Advocate S Alom represented the Respondent.
Brief Facts
The wife had filed an Application under Section 125 of the CrPC for the grant of maintenance. Which was allowed by the Magistrate. Aggrieved by the same, the husband filed a Revision Petition. The Sessions Court refused to grant maintenance to the wife, but the Order granting maintenance to the child was upheld.
The Sessions Court’s refusal was based on the reasoning that the wife’s evidence was “self-contradictory” and went “against her pleadings,” rendering her testimony “wholly unreliable“. The Sessions Court also noted that while she admitted living separately from her husband, she had “not been able to show that there was any sufficient cause for living separately“. The Sessions Court stated that the Trial Court’s presumption that “no woman would leave her matrimonial home without any reason” was “not a presumption permitted by law“.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court held, “The petitioner and the respondent are dark complexioned people. But their child was fair complexioned. That is the reason why the dispute between the wife and the husband arose. The husband started to physically harass the wife and drove her out of the matrimonial house along with the child. These things have appeared in evidence.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “For the aforesaid reasons, the inherent power of this Court deserves to be exercised for the ends of justice. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is allowed. The judgment dated 05.12.2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chirang at Kajalgaon in Criminal Revision Case No.02/2020, is set aside.”
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the Petition.
Cause Title: X v. Y (Neutral Citation: 2025:GAU-AS:7253)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocates AK Hussain, A Haque, B Hussain and S Hazarika
Respondent: Advocates S Alom, M S Alam and A Begum
