The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition filed by a lawyer seeking speedy disposal of a maintenance case against his wife, terming the litigation 'vexatious' and 'born out of pretences.' The court imposed a compensatory cost of Rs 15 lakh for suppression of material facts.
Court's Observations
Justice Vinod Diwakar ordered the petitioner-husband, an advocate by profession, to pay the amount to his wife after noting that he had concealed key details in his affidavits and misused financial resources, allegedly leaving his wife under 'systemic depletion.'
Case Background
According to case details, the couple was married on May 18, 2019. At the time of marriage, both were preparing for competitive examinations. Soon after, the wife secured a job as an additional private secretary in the Allahabad High Court, while the husband—though a law graduate and registered advocate—remained unemployed. Over time, disputes escalated, leading to multiple legal proceedings.
The husband filed a maintenance application before the family court in Etawah and later approached the high court seeking expeditious disposal, claiming he had no independent source of income. The wife opposed the plea, alleging that the husband had taken significant personal loans from her salary account on false promises.
Loans and Allegations
It was submitted on her behalf that on November 10, 2020, her husband took a personal loan of Rs 11.50 lakh from her SBI salary account, allegedly on the assurance of purchasing a plot of land. Later, on October 6, 2022, he again took a loan of Rs 13.56 lakh, repayable over six years, from her salary account at another SBI branch in Prayagraj. The wife has since been paying a monthly EMI of Rs 26,020, which will continue till October 2028.
The wife further alleged that the loans were diverted for personal use, including through UPI transfers, and were spent on 'alcoholic drinks, luxurious lifestyle, and other nefarious activities.' She also told the court that 'fed up by the petitioner, the wife filed a divorce petition, and on May 20, 2025, her husband filed an application for maintenance based on concocted and false averments.'
Family Court Order
The family court had earlier, on September 15, 2025, directed the wife to pay Rs 5,000 per month as interim maintenance along with Rs 10,000 towards litigation expenses. The wife challenged this order, and her review application is currently pending before the family court in Prayagraj.
High Court's Criticism
After examining the material on record and the conduct of the petitioner, the High Court strongly criticised his approach, noting that material facts had been suppressed. The court observed, 'Needless to mention, the entire loan amount has been unauthorisedly misused by the petitioner-husband as reflected from the pattern of withdrawal of the amount, while some transactions reflect a large amount had been transferred through UPI and other similar modes.'
The court further held that the petition did not merit interference under its supervisory jurisdiction. It stated, 'In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court is of the considered opinion that the present petition does not warrant the exercise of supervisory jurisdiction vested with this court.'
Compensatory Cost
The court added: 'Accordingly, the equity demands that the present petition be dismissed with the compensatory cost of Rs 15,00,000 to be given to the respondent-wife within six weeks from today by way of a demand draft.' The high court also warned that if the cost is not deposited within the stipulated time, the District Magistrate of Etawah will recover the amount as arrears of land revenue within three months after the deadline. Additionally, the court directed the district magistrate to form a committee to examine the movable and immovable assets of the petitioner and ensure compliance with the order.
