{"id":1862,"date":"2025-11-28T13:54:12","date_gmt":"2025-11-28T08:24:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/?p=1862"},"modified":"2025-11-28T13:39:49","modified_gmt":"2025-11-28T08:09:49","slug":"slams-muslim-for-maintenance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.shoneekapoor.com\/legal-news\/slams-muslim-for-maintenance\/","title":{"rendered":"Kerala High Court Slams Muslim Husband for Dodging Maintenance to 1st Wife: “If You Can\u2019t Do Justice to 2 Wives, Marry Only 1”"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The Kerala High Court ruled that a Muslim man cannot deny maintenance to his first wife by saying he must support his second wife or that his son is already helping her. The Court said polygamy is only an exceptional situation and the husband must treat all wives fairly, including in maintenance.<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

KOCHI<\/em>: The Kerala High Court<\/strong> held that a Muslim man<\/strong> cannot avoid paying maintenance<\/strong> to his first wife<\/strong> by saying that he has a second wife to support<\/strong> or that his son is giving her money.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Justice Kauser Edappagath<\/a><\/strong> gave this ruling while dismissing two connected petitions filed by the husband, Muhammed Vappinu, against orders passed by two family courts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court explained that Muslim personal law<\/strong> may permit more than one marriage, but this is only allowed in very rare situations and only when the husband can do complete justice to all wives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court said:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“A Muslim husband does not have a vested right to have more than one wife. Monogamy is the rule and polygamy is an exception under Muslim law. Polygamy for men is allowed under Muslim law only in exceptional and extraordinary circumstances, that too, under the strict injunction that all the wives must be treated equally and equitably.”<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

The Court added that fairness does not mean only love or emotional care, but also proper financial support. It stressed that when a man chooses to enter into a second marriage while the first marriage is still valid<\/strong>, he must take full responsibility for both wives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Judge referred to the Quranic verse and stated:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“The verse in the Quran (IV: 3) which permits polygamy makes it abundantly clear that if one is apprehensive of dealing justly with all his wives, he must marry only one. The term \u2018to do justly with all wives\u2019 implies not only the equality in love and affection but also the equality in maintenance. Therefore, a Muslim husband who contracted a second marriage during the subsistence of his first marriage cannot contend that he has no means to maintain his first wife. The fact that the husband has a second wife and is liable to maintain her cannot be a factor in denying maintenance to the first wife or reducing the quantum of maintenance she is entitled to.”<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Background Of The Dispute<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first wife, Fathima, had filed a maintenance case in 2016 stating that she had no job or income and her husband, who worked in the Gulf for more than 40 years, had enough means to support her. The Family Court granted her \u20b95,000 per month.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The husband challenged this order in the High Court, claiming that he was jobless, that his wife ran a beauty parlour and earned money, and that he also had to support his second wife. He also argued that his son was maintaining his mother, so he (the husband) should not be forced to pay.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, the Court found that he had produced no evidence<\/strong> to show that his wife was earning anything, and it also took note of the fact that he was living with and maintaining his second wife. The Court said that his responsibility towards the first wife cannot stop simply because he chose to remarry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Wife\u2019s Right To Maintenance Is Independent<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court also clarified an important point regarding Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS)<\/a>,<\/strong> which deals with maintenance of wives, children and parents. It said a wife\u2019s right under this section is not affected even if her children support her.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Court observed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

“The fact that the son or daughter of a woman has sufficient means and provides maintenance to her would not absolve the husband of his independent statutory obligation under Section 144(1)(a) of BNSS (Section 125(1)(a) of Cr.P.C.) to support his wife if she needs it.”<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

So, even if the son is taking care of his mother, the husband must still pay maintenance as per the law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Living Separately Is Justified If Husband Marries Again<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The husband also argued that his first wife left him without any reason and therefore she should not get maintenance. But the Court rejected this argument, saying that entering into a second marriage without the consent<\/strong> of the first wife is a completely valid reason for her to live separately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It stated that a Muslim wife is not<\/strong> barred from claiming maintenance only because she chooses to live apart after the husband enters into another marriage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Final Decision<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

After considering all facts and the law, the Kerala High Court upheld both the family courts\u2019 orders:<\/p>\n\n\n\n