Bengaluru Woman's Educational Dreams Shattered by Dowry-Harassing Husband
A Bengaluru court has delivered a significant verdict in a domestic violence case where a husband prevented his wife from pursuing higher education despite pre-marriage promises, while simultaneously subjecting her to relentless dowry harassment.
The judicial magistrate first class (traffic court VI) earlier this month found the husband guilty of domestic violence and economic abandonment, ordering him to pay monthly maintenance and litigation costs to his wife.
Broken Promises and Dowry Demands
The case originated from a marriage solemnized on October 16, 2016, where the husband had explicitly assured the 30-year-old woman that she could continue her studies after marriage. However, when she attempted to pursue her education in 2017, he refused permission and denied her financial support while threatening to abandon her.
The harassment escalated with persistent dowry demands. The woman revealed that her parents had already given 165 grams of gold as dowry during the wedding. Her husband repeatedly demanded all her jewellery, which she eventually handed over out of fear. He then allegedly pledged her gold with Muthoot Finance and never retrieved it.
Whenever the woman inquired about her jewellery, her husband responded with verbal abuse, creating an environment of constant fear and intimidation.
Abandonment During Pandemic and Continued Harassment
The situation deteriorated further during the COVID-19 lockdown in May 2020, when the husband left for Udupi promising to return in June but never did. He stopped sending money for rent and essential expenses, forcing the woman to move back with her parents.
His family members allegedly joined the harassment, verbally abusing her over phone calls. The husband would only contact her to insist on sexually explicit conversations, becoming abusive when she refused to participate.
In an attempt to reconcile, her family purchased 114 grams of gold worth Rs 4.2 lakh and sent her to Udupi. However, conflicts arose over their living arrangements—whether to reside in Udupi or Bengaluru—leading to continued harassment where he allegedly locked her inside the house, restricted her movements, and refused to pay the Bengaluru house rent.
The husband ultimately vacated their Bengaluru home in January 2021, selling their furniture and belongings without informing her.
Failed Divorce Attempt and Financial Exploitation
In April 2021, the husband abandoned the complainant and issued a notice of Talaq-e-Hasan—a religious divorce process where a Muslim man pronounces "talaq" once monthly over three months. The court later treated this religious divorce as void.
Financial exploitation formed a significant part of the case. The woman's family had given him Rs 2,62,500 between 2016 and 2021 to cover his personal expenses and house rent, in addition to the substantial gold gifts.
Unable to endure the continuous harassment, the woman filed for divorce on August 10, 2023. Her husband appeared through counsel, admitted to the marriage but denied all allegations including dowry demands and domestic violence, seeking dismissal of her petition.
Court's Landmark Judgment
After examining all evidence, the court observed that domestic violence and harassment extended beyond the husband to include his brother, who had allegedly taunted and threatened the woman between 2017 and 2020 when she demanded return of her gold.
The court noted that the husband, despite earning Rs 1 lakh per month, had paid no maintenance since their separation in 2020, deliberately neglecting to support her and amounting to economic abandonment.
The husband's defense—that he couldn't pay maintenance because he needed to support his brother's family—was firmly rejected. The court emphasized that a man has no legal obligation to maintain his adult brother, and a wife's right to maintenance takes clear precedence.
The court termed his neglect deliberate, stating: "A husband cannot evade his legal and moral responsibility to maintain his wife by inflating liabilities or withholding truthful financial details."
On November 3, the court ordered the husband to pay Rs 10,000 per month as maintenance from the case filing date, Rs 1 lakh as lump-sum monetary relief within three months, and Rs 75,000 towards litigation expenses.
This judgment serves as an important precedent for protecting women's rights against dowry harassment and economic abandonment, while reinforcing the legal obligation of spouses to provide maintenance regardless of fabricated financial excuses.
