Conflicting claims over income arise in domestic violence cases: Court

In a domestic violence case, usually the wife exaggerates her husband's income and the husband claims to be penniless, a Delhi court has observed while turning down a woman's plea to enhance her monthly maintenance.
Additional Sessions Judge Ajay Kumar Kuhar dismissedthe woman's appeal against a magisterial court order awarding her an interim maintenance of Rs 3,000 per month in a harassment case lodged by her against her husband.
"It is a common practice that in such cases the aggrieved person will most of the time exaggerate the income of the husband and husband would claim to be penniless.
"No substantive documentary evidence would be on the record at the initial stage when a magistrate has to pass an order on an application under the Domestic Violence (DV) Act for grant of interim maintenance," the judge said.

The court said that in the absence of any documentary evidence to establish the income of the husband, a reasonable approach would be to award interim maintenance considering the status of parties, their earning capacity and the minimum income of the husband as per the Minimum Wages Act.
The court, however, also rejected the husband's stand that he could not pay her the amount as he was jobless, saying he could not escape his responsibility of providing the minimum financial assistance to his wife for sustenance.

It said the aggrieved wife could not be left by him high and for want of a sufficient amount to cater to her daily needs.

"The husband, who may not be highly qualified, cannot escape his responsibility of providing the minimum financial assistance to his wife for sustenance.
"Therefore, award of interim maintenance of Rs 3,000 considering the income of the husband to be Rs 9,000 per month, in the given circumstances, was justified," it said.
The woman had sought enhancement of the maintenance amount on the ground that her husband was running a cyber cafe and earned quite well.
The husband, on the other hand, had claimed he was not educated and was jobless.
The woman had alleged that the man, whom she married in 2013, used to physically and mentally torture her for bringing insufficient dowry.