It’s Saturday, January 24, 2026, and the legal world in Prayagraj is buzzing over a judgment that basically says, “You can’t break someone’s legs and then ask them to run a marathon for you.”
The Allahabad High Court just dropped a heavy ruling on spousal maintenance. The thing is, if a wife or her family is responsible for making the husband physically or financially incapable of working, she loses her right to claim maintenance. Or nothing.
Also Read | Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi Sentenced to 17 Years in Jail
The Case of the Paralyzed Doctor: Field Notes
This isn’t your typical matrimonial dispute. It’s an ongoing situation involving a homeopathic doctor, a clinic shooting, and a very literal “smoking gun.” Here’s the ground reality:
-
The Incident: Dr. Ved Prakash Singh was at his clinic in Kushinagar when his brother-in-law and father-in-law allegedly stormed in and shot him. The thing is, a pellet is still lodged in his spinal cord.
-
The Medical Dilemma: Surgeons say removing the pellet is a 50/50 shot at total paralysis. So, the doctor lives in constant pain, can’t sit for long, and definitely can’t run a clinic. Those too.
Also Read | Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi Sentenced to 17 Years in Jail
-
The Wife’s Claim: Despite the shooting, the wife filed for maintenance under Section 125 of the CrPC, arguing that as a doctor, he had “sufficient means” to pay her.
-
The Court’s Hammer: Justice Lakshmi Kant Shukla wasn’t having it. He upheld a 2025 Family Court decision, stating that while a husband has a “pious obligation” to maintain his wife, it’s not an absolute “suicide pact.” If the wife’s side destroyed his ability to earn, asking for money is “grave injustice.” Or nothing.
Also Read | Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi Sentenced to 17 Years in Jail
Maintenance Law: The “Incapacity” Shift
| Legal Principle | Standard Rule | The “Ved Prakash” Exception |
| Husband’s Duty | Must maintain wife even if unemployed. | Obligation ends if wife caused the unemployment. |
| Earning Capacity | “Potential to earn” is usually enough. | Physical incapacity caused by wife’s family = No liability. |
| Section 125 CrPC | Designed for social justice/preventing vagrancy. | Cannot be used to “take advantage” of one’s own wrong. |
| Burden of Proof | Husband must prove he can’t pay. | Established: Spinal injury via wife’s relatives. |
Also Read | Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi Sentenced to 17 Years in Jail
And Here’s the Kicker…
The thing is, the court pointed out that no law explicitly forces a wife to maintain her husband, but equity flows both ways. Let’s be real—the court basically called out the hypocrisy of trying to extract financial support from a man your own father tried to kill. Those too.
One side comment—this ruling is being seen as a massive win for “Men’s Rights” advocates in India who argue that maintenance laws are often applied too mechanically. It’s an ongoing situation where the judiciary is looking at the conduct of the parties, not just their gender roles. Or nothing.
Also Read | Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi Sentenced to 17 Years in Jail
End…
