Wife Failed To Prove Adultery, Yet Husband Ordered To Pay ₹50 Lakh Alimony: Patna High Court Appoints Special Officer to Verify His Assets
Curated by NEWS DESK
Editorial DeskPATNA: The Patna High Court has directed a husband to pay his wife ₹50 lakh as permanent alimony after appointing a Special Officer to verify his actual assets, income, and financial position. The decision came in a matrimonial dispute where the wife failed to prove her allegation of adultery against her husband.
A Division Bench of Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh, in its judgment dated October 5, 2026, allowed the wife's matrimonial appeal and set aside the Family Court's earlier decision dismissing her divorce petition.
The couple married on January 24, 2010, according to Christian customs in Patna. However, the wife left the matrimonial home on March 10, 2010, less than two months after the marriage.
The wife alleged that her father had paid ₹5 lakh to the husband and another ₹6 lakh for furniture. She also accused her husband of having an illicit relationship with a domestic worker and subjecting her to physical and mental cruelty.
The husband denied the allegations of adultery, cruelty and substantial income. He maintained that the domestic worker had been associated with his household for several years.
After examining the evidence, the High Court found that the wife had failed to prove the allegation of adultery. However, considering the prolonged separation, the Court granted a divorce on the ground of desertion.
Read Also:- Latest Supreme Court Maintenance Judgements 2026: Complete Legal Guide For Husbands
The High Court also criticised the Family Court for deciding the divorce petition under the Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872, instead of the applicable Divorce Act, 1869.
The Bench observed:
"It is not only an ignorance, but sheer negligence on the part of the concerned Trial Judge."
The dispute then turned to permanent alimony. The wife claimed that she had no independent income and required ₹40,450 every month for her expenses. She had earlier been awarded ₹10,000 in monthly maintenance and alleged that her husband stopped paying it in February 2025.
The husband disclosed an annual income of ₹4,21,740, including rental income, for assessment year 2025–26.
Because the parties gave sharply different accounts of his financial position, the High Court appointed a Special Officer to investigate the husband's assets and earnings.
The officer's report, submitted on September 30, 2026, found that the husband's surgical shop was closed, his school had stopped functioning, and no operational doctor's clinic or real estate consultancy business could be verified.
However, the investigation also identified a residential property, additional rental income of ₹15,000 per month, and a property mortgaged as security for a commercial loan.
The report recorded that Yes Bank had valued the husband's mortgaged property at ₹4 crore. The property was among the securities for a ₹9.80 crore commercial loan obtained by a company.
Considering the financial records and property valuation, the High Court observed:
"Therefore, the respondent is a man of substance."
The Court concluded that ₹50 lakh in permanent alimony would enable the wife to maintain herself, noting that investing the amount in a fixed deposit could generate about ₹40,000 per month.
Accordingly, the husband was directed to pay ₹50 lakh within three months of the judgment.
The Court further clarified that after payment of the permanent alimony, the husband would no longer be required to pay the existing maintenance allowance. It also directed that pending cases between the parties arising from their matrimonial relationship be dropped upon payment.
EXPLANATORY TABLE OF LAWS AND SECTIONS
| Law / Provision | What It Means | Application In This Case |
|---|---|---|
| Section 10(1), Indian Christian Marriage Act, 1872 | The Family Court referred to this provision while deciding the divorce petition. It is not the applicable law governing Christian divorce. | The High Court criticised the Family Court for applying the wrong statute. |
| Divorce Act, 1869 | Governs divorce and related matrimonial relief for Christians in India. | The High Court identified it as the applicable legislation. |
| Section 10, Divorce Act, 1869 | Provides grounds for dissolution of Christian marriages, including desertion subject to statutory conditions. | The Court granted divorce on the ground of prolonged desertion, although the wife had not proved adultery. |
| Section 37, Divorce Act, 1869 | Provides for permanent alimony for a wife, considering relevant circumstances and the husband's ability to pay. | Relevant to the Court's decision directing payment of ₹50 lakh permanent alimony. |
| Maintenance Order, MJC No. 180/2019 | An earlier order granted the wife ₹10,000 in monthly maintenance. | The High Court directed that the existing maintenance obligation would cease upon payment of permanent alimony. |
CASE DETAILS
| Particular | Details |
|---|---|
| Case Title | S v. V |
| Court | Patna High Court |
| Bench | Justice Bibek Chaudhuri and Justice Rana Vikram Singh |
| Judgment Date | October 5, 2026 |
| Case Number | Miscellaneous Appeal No. 83 of 2025 |
| CNR Number | BRHC010090932025 |
| Original Case | Matrimonial (Divorce) Case No. 5313 of 2014 |
| Appellant / Wife's Counsel | Mr Sagar Suman, Advocate |
| Respondent / Husband's Counsel | Mr Rohitabh Das, Advocate |
| Case Status | Appeal allowed; divorce granted; permanent alimony awarded |
KEY TAKEAWAYS
- Wife's Adultery Allegations Unproved: Husband faced serious accusations that could not be established in court.
- ₹50 Lakh Alimony Burden on Husband: Despite unproved adultery allegations, the husband was ordered to pay a massive amount.
- Just 45 Days of Married Life: Wife left the matrimonial home, but the husband's legal battle continued for years.
- Husband's Assets Put Under Scrutiny: The court appointed a Special Officer to investigate his income and properties.
- 16 Years of Legal Battle for a 45-Day Marriage: A short-lived marriage ended with a ₹50 lakh financial liability for the husband
Share Your Thoughts
Comments are moderated before publication.