Kerala HC: Non-Payment of Maintenance is Economic Abuse in Domestic Violence

The Kerala High Court has ruled that the non-payment of maintenance by itself constitutes economic abuse, which is a form of domestic violence under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The court made the observation while dismissing a petition challenging a magistrate's order directing a man to pay ₹10,000 per month as maintenance to his wife and child.

Justice Jobin Sebastian, presiding over the case, held that claims of domestic violence do not require independent corroboration because such harassment typically occurs within the privacy of the home. The court found no reason to interfere with the magistrate's order, which had been upheld by the District Court in Palakkad.

The husband had challenged the maintenance order on the grounds that the amount was excessive and that his wife was employed as a teacher in a private college. He also denied the allegations of domestic violence, arguing that they lacked independent evidence.

However, the court noted that the woman had testified before the magistrate about multiple instances of ill-treatment and harassment by her husband. She stated that she was forced to leave the matrimonial home with her child due to the abuse and had been living separately for a year, during which time the husband did not pay any maintenance. She also claimed that her husband misappropriated her gold ornaments for his business.

The High Court observed that the woman's employment at a private college was short-term and provided a nominal salary, which was not sufficient reason to deny maintenance. The court described the maintenance amount as 'just and fair' and noted that the husband, being an able-bodied person, was legally obligated to ensure a dignified life for his wife and child.

This ruling reinforces the legal principle that economic abuse—such as withholding financial support—is a recognized form of domestic violence under Indian law. It also highlights the court's stance that victims of domestic violence should not be disbelieved solely because their claims occur in private spaces.