Husband Obligated To Support Wife's Education, Empower Her: MP High Court Grants Maintenance To Wife Pursuing MD Homeopathy

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on Wednesday (October 15), granted maintenance to a woman living separately from her husband and pursuing her MD in Homoeopathy, observing that a husband also has a duty to help complete the course that would enhance his wife's capabilities and empower her.

In doing so, the bench also set aside the order of the family court that rejected the woman's application for maintenance. 

The bench of Justice Gajendra Singh held; 

"Entering into marital tie up does not mean end of personality of the wife... If the husband has a duty towards his parents, then he has also the duty to complete the course that would enhance the capability of the wife and to empower her. Equality in marital tie up does not mean development of only one and only restrictions for the other especially wife". 

Per the facts, the couple got married on February 20, 2018, according to Hindu rituals. She claimed that she was ousted from the matrimonial home on June 24, 2018, for allegedly not fulfilling the dowry demand. Therefore, on November 14, she approached the Family Court seeking maintenance of ₹25,000 on the grounds of cruelty and neglect of maintenance.

However, the husband opposed the plea, claiming that the wife was a qualified medical practitioner and earned ₹45,000 per month. He further argued that no demand for dowry was made. He further prayed for dismissal of the petition, claiming that his aged parents were dependent on him. 

The Family Court, noting that the wife was living separately without sufficient reasons, rejected her claim for maintenance. Aggrieved, the wife filed a revision before the High Court. 

The counsel for the wife contended that renewing registration for practice does not raise the presumption that she was working as a practitioner. It was further argued that she was unemployed and dependent on her father. The wife claimed that after taking a bank loan, she applied for post-graduation at Swasthya Kalyan Hospital. On the other hand, the husband was a skilled and qualified person working as a Technician and earning 74,000 per month. 

The court observed that in September of 2017, the wife completed her Bachelor of Homoeopathic Medicine Course and registered as a practitioner. Subsequently, she got married in 2018 and in 2023 pursued her post-graduation in MD (Homeopathy).

The court noted that during her registration period, she provided her services during the COVID-19 pandemic as a temporary Aayush Chikitsak under the National Health Mission, first for a period of 89 days, and then for a period of 62 days. For this temporary service, she received a stipend of Rs. 25,000/- per month. 

Per the record, the wife's parents made efforts to reconcile the couple on two occasions but failed. Subsequently, the wife filed for maintenance. The court noted that after the wife filed an application for maintenance and sent the notice to the husband, he also filed for restitution of conjugal rights. 

The court noted that the wife did not wish to reside with the husband. The husband also failed to take any action to reconcile with the wife, as evident from his examination-in-chief. It was noted that the husband, however, wasted his energy to prove that his wife was earning as a Homeopathic Medical Practitioner. 

The bench did not concur with the Family Court's findings that the wife did not have sufficient reasons to reside separately. The bench further acknowledged that the husband was caring for his aged parents, but also emphasised that he could not ignore the obligations towards his wife. 

The court further emphasized that if the husband has duty towards his parents, he also has a duty towards his wife to support her education, which would enhance her capability and empower her.  The court observed that equality in marital ties does not amount to development for one spouse but restrictions for the other.

Therefore, the impugned order of the Family Court was set aside, observing that the wife would need financial support in pursuing her MD in Homoeopathy.

"Thus, an amount of Rs.15,000/- per month is quantified as maintenance payable to the revision petitioner/wife which shall be payable from the date of application except the period of one year for which the revision petitioner was getting stipend", the court directed. 

Case Title: V v SS [2025:MPHC-IND:30316]

For Wife: Advocate Pragya Swami

For Husband: Advocate Nipun Choudhary

Click here to read/download the Order