Alimony is not charity

Mutual trust and love are the foundation of marriage. This relationship can fall apart for many reasons. Even excessive involvement of the husband's or wife's families can sometimes lead to the breakdown of a marriage. It is said that marriage is made in heaven, but if a couple loses love and trust, marriage can turn into hell. The new generation does not show any interest in continuing the married life somehow for the sake of the children or fearing the society's view. There is no need for it in the new age. Divorce is then the way out for the couple. The number of divorces in the society has also increased. Even the courts are putting more emphasis on granting divorce.

In Western countries, a man is required to give a portion of his property to his ex-wife after getting divorced. However, there is no such law in India. In most divorce cases, the wife's family does not demand alimony once they get back the gold, dowry, etc given to the husband's family during the marriage. Many people are even ready to sacrifice the gold and money given to the husband's family thinking that they just want to get rid of the marriage somehow. In short, half of those who get divorced do not even approach the court seeking alimony. Even after the dissolution of the marriage, both the mother and the father will still be accountable for providing for the children's non-educational and educational requirements.

Hence, it is not only a legal obligation but also a moral obligation for an earning man to pay a portion of his income as alimony. It is a primitive practice to create distinctions in this regard in the name of caste and religion. The recent order issued by the Supreme Court stating that Muslim women can also claim alimony under CrPC can be described as a historic judgment. Justices BV Nagaratna and Augustine George Masih made it clear in their respective rulings that alimony is not a charity, but the right of married women belonging to all religions. The court pointed out that Section 125 of the CrPC applies not only to married women but to all women of all religions. The bench also held that the Protection of Rights of Muslim Women on Divorce Act, 1986 cannot take precedence over a secular law like the CrPC.

Justice Nagaratna wrote the judgment by assessing that not allowing Muslim women to seek legal redress through the CrPC is a denial of the Constitution, and those who have been divorced through triple talaq can also approach the court through the CrPC. The apex court made the historic judgement after rejecting the petition of a Muslim man challenging the Telangana High Court order to pay interim maintenance to his divorced wife.