In Indian law, the right of a wife to claim maintenance from her husband is governed by various statutes, including Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) or Section 144 of BNSS, Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and provisions in the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. However, there are specific grounds on which a wife's claim for maintenance can be denied. Here are some primary grounds with relevant case references where courts have interpreted these provisions:

1. Wife Living in Adultery
   • Ground: Under Section 125(4) of the CrPC, if the wife is found to be living in adultery, she is not entitled to claim maintenance.
   • Case Reference: Savitri vs. Govind Singh Rawat, 1985 SCR (3) 394
   • Facts: The court denied maintenance to the wife on the grounds of her alleged adultery.
   • Judgment: The Supreme Court held that if the wife is found to be living in an adulterous relationship, she forfeits her right to maintenance.
   • Significance: This case set a clear precedent that adultery disentitles a wife from claiming maintenance, as the relationship between the husband and wife is expected to be based on fidelity.
      
2. Wife Living Separately Without Sufficient Reason
   • Ground: Section 125(4) of the CrPC specifies that if a wife voluntarily separates from her husband without a justified reason, she cannot claim maintenance.
   • Case Reference: Ramesh Chander Kaushal vs. Veena Kaushal, 1978 AIR 1807
   • Facts: The wife was living separately without sufficient cause and demanded maintenance.
   • Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC, the wife must have a valid reason for living separately.
   • Significance: This case highlights that a wife must demonstrate a valid cause for separation, such as cruelty or desertion by the husband. Mere dislike or minor disputes are insufficient grounds to claim maintenance.
      
3. Wife Earning Sufficient Income
   • Ground: If the wife is financially independent and has sufficient income to support herself, maintenance may be denied.
   • Case Reference: Mamta Jaiswal vs. Rajesh Jaiswal, 2000 (3) MPLJ 100
   • Facts: The wife was well-educated and employed, yet claimed maintenance from her husband.
   • Judgment: The Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that an educated wife capable of earning cannot rely solely on her husband for support and thus denied her claim for maintenance.
   • Significance: The case reinforced the view that maintenance is aimed at supporting a wife who cannot support herself. If she is capable and has the means, her maintenance claim can be refused.
4. Wife's Desertion of Husband Without Reasonable Cause
   Ground: If the wife leaves her husband's company without a reasonable cause, her maintenance claim can be denied under Section 125(4) of the CrPC.
   Case Reference: Rohtash Singh vs. Ramendri, AIR 2000 SC 952
   Facts: The wife had left her husband's home without providing a reasonable cause and sought maintenance.
   Judgment: The Supreme Court held that a wife who deserts her husband without any reasonable cause is not entitled to maintenance under the CrPC.
   Significance: This case established that desertion without valid cause disentitles a wife to maintenance, supporting the principle that only a wife wronged by her husband can seek such support.
    
5. Mutual Agreement for Separation
   Ground: If the wife and husband have mutually agreed to separate and the wife has waived her right to maintenance through this agreement, the claim for maintenance may be denied.
   Case Reference: Vanamala vs. H.M. Ranganatha Bhatta, 1995 AIR 292, 1995 SCC (5) 299
   Facts: The parties had agreed on separation terms, including financial support, but the wife later sought additional maintenance.
   Judgment: The Supreme Court held that if both parties have entered into a mutual separation agreement with terms on maintenance, the wife may be denied additional maintenance.
   Significance: This case set a precedent that mutual agreements, especially where terms for support are specified, can limit or bar additional claims for maintenance.
    
6. Wife's Refusal to Reside with Husband Without Valid Grounds
   Ground: If the wife refuses to live with her husband without legitimate grounds, her claim for maintenance can be denied.
   Case Reference: Sureshta Devi vs. Om Prakash, 1991 AIR 2176
   Facts: The wife refused to live with her husband and sought maintenance.
   Judgment: The Supreme Court held that a wife refusing to reside with her husband without valid reason cannot claim maintenance.
   Significance: This ruling emphasized that, unless there is just cause (e.g., cruelty, fear for safety), a wife's refusal to live with her husband can nullify her claim for maintenance.
    
7. Divorce on Grounds of Wife's Fault
   Ground: If the wife is divorced on grounds of her own misconduct, such as cruelty, she may lose her right to claim maintenance.
   Case Reference: Bipin Chandra Jaisinghbhai Shah vs. Prabhavati, 1956 SCR 838
   Facts: The wife was divorced due to cruelty and other acts against her husband.
   Judgment: The court noted that a divorced wife whose marriage ended due to her own misconduct may lose her right to maintenance.
   Significance: This case clarified that when a wife is divorced due to her own fault, such as cruelty, she may be disentitled to claim maintenance.
    
8. Wife Remarried After Divorce
   Ground: If the wife has remarried after divorce, she forfeits her right to maintenance from her former husband.
   Case Reference: D. Velusamy vs. D. Patchaiammal, (2010) 10 SCC 469
   Facts: The case involved the issue of whether a divorced wife who had remarried could claim maintenance from her former husband.
   Judgment: The Supreme Court held that upon remarriage, a wife is not entitled to maintenance from her former husband, as she now has an obligation to rely on her new spouse.
   Significance: This case emphasized that a woman loses the right to maintenance from her ex-husband after remarriage.
    
9. Wife Engaged in Cruelty Toward Husband
   • Ground: If the wife is found guilty of cruelty toward her husband, she may not be entitled to maintenance.
   • Case Reference: Savitri Pandey vs. Prem Chandra Pandey, AIR 2002 SC 591
   • Facts: The husband argued that his wife was guilty of cruelty, and therefore she should not be entitled to maintenance.
   • Judgment: The Supreme Court held that cruelty by the wife is a valid ground for the husband to refuse maintenance if it has been established as a reason for their separation.
   • Significance: This case established that cruelty by a wife against her husband can bar her from claiming maintenance.
      
10. Wife in a Live-In Relationship with Another Man
    • Ground: A wife involved in a live-in relationship with another man after separation from her husband may be denied maintenance.
    • Case Reference: Savitaben Somabhai Bhatiya vs. State of Gujarat, AIR 2005 SC 1809
    • Facts: The wife had entered a live-in relationship with another man and was seeking maintenance from her husband.
    • Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that a wife cohabiting with another man post-separation is not entitled to maintenance from her husband.
    • Significance: The case highlighted that cohabitation with another man can disqualify a wife from maintenance claims.
       
11. Wife's Willful Neglect of Husband
    • Ground: If the wife neglects her duties and responsibilities toward her husband without valid reason, she may be denied maintenance.
    • Case Reference: Bhagwan Dutt vs. Kamla Devi, AIR 1975 SC 83
    • Facts: The husband claimed that his wife had willfully neglected him, leading to their separation.
    • Judgment: The Supreme Court held that neglect by the wife without just cause can be a ground for denying maintenance.
    • Significance: This case reinforced the principle that a wife must fulfill her marital obligations to claim maintenance, and willful neglect without reason is grounds for denial.
       
12. Wife's Voluntary Abandonment of Matrimonial Home
    • Ground: If the wife voluntarily abandons her husband without justification, her claim for maintenance can be denied.
    • Case Reference: Kalpana Srivastava vs. Surendra Nath Srivastava, 1985 AIR 1123
    • Facts: The wife left her matrimonial home without adequate reason and later sought maintenance.
    • Judgment: The court denied maintenance, stating that a wife who abandons her husband without a valid reason loses her right to maintenance.
    • Significance: This case highlighted that a wife's voluntary abandonment without a reasonable cause can disqualify her from receiving maintenance.
       
13. Wife's Misrepresentation of Marriage for Financial Gain
    • Ground: If a wife has misrepresented her marital status or financial needs solely to obtain maintenance, her claim may be denied.
    • Case Reference: Bipinchandra Jaisinghbai Shah vs. Prabhavati, AIR 1957 SC 176
    • Facts: The wife was found to have misrepresented certain facts regarding her financial status to secure maintenance.
    • Judgment: The Supreme Court ruled that a wife misrepresenting her circumstances or marital status for financial gain is not entitled to maintenance.
    • Significance: The case underscored that dishonesty or fraudulent misrepresentation disqualifies a wife from maintenance claims.
       
14. Wife with Ample Self-Supporting Means
    • Ground: If the wife possesses substantial income or property sufficient for self-support, she may be denied maintenance.
    • Case Reference: Chaturbhuj vs. Sita Bai, AIR 2008 SC 530
    • Facts: The husband argued that his wife had ample financial means and did not require his support.
    • Judgment: The Supreme Court held that a wife capable of self-support through her own income or property is not entitled to maintenance from her husband.
    • Significance: This case reinforced that maintenance is meant to aid a wife lacking sufficient resources, not one who is financially independent.
       
15. Wife Refusing to Comply with Mutual Divorce Agreement Terms
    Ground: If the wife has previously entered into a mutual divorce agreement that included specific terms about maintenance and she later goes against these terms, her claim may be denied.
    Case Reference: Ravi Kumar vs. Julmidevi, (2010) 4 SCC 476
    Facts: The wife entered a mutual divorce agreement with the husband, which specified terms of support, and then demanded additional maintenance.
    Judgment: The Supreme Court upheld that parties are bound by the terms of a mutually agreed divorce settlement regarding maintenance.
    Significance: This case demonstrated that a wife cannot claim additional maintenance if she previously agreed to specific support terms as part of a mutual divorce settlement.
     
16. Wife Found Guilty of Conspiring Against Husband
    Ground: If the wife is found to have conspired against her husband in any form, such as attempting to harm him or damage his reputation, she may lose her claim to maintenance.
    Case Reference: Vimala (K.) vs. Veeraswamy (K.), (1991) 2 SCC 375
    Facts: The husband claimed that his wife had conspired against him, damaging his social standing.
    Judgment: The Supreme Court held that if a wife's actions are against the husband's interest and are proven to be malicious, her right to maintenance may be denied.
    Significance: This case highlights that malintent or conspiracy by the wife against the husband can forfeit her claim to maintenance.
     
17. Wife Failing to Perform Marital Obligations
    Ground: A wife who consistently refuses to fulfill her marital duties without a valid reason may be denied maintenance.
    Case Reference: Suresh Kumar Kaushal vs. Kiran Kaushal, (2002) DMC 597
    Facts: The wife repeatedly refused to perform her marital duties, and the husband sought denial of maintenance.
    Judgment: The court held that a wife refusing to fulfill marital obligations without reasonable cause is not entitled to maintenance.
    Significance: This case clarifies that maintenance is conditional upon the wife's willingness to fulfill her marital role, barring instances where she has a valid reason not to.
     
18. Wife Refusing to Stay with Husband's Family without Just Cause
    Ground: If the wife refuses to live with the husband's family (when required by custom or agreement) without sufficient cause, her maintenance claim can be denied.
    Case Reference: Kalidas Gangadhar Gosavi vs. Keshubai Gangadhar Gosavi, AIR 1932 Bom 457
    Facts: The wife refused to live with her husband's family, contrary to family tradition and without reasonable cause.
    Judgment: The Bombay High Court held that refusal to live with the husband's family without sufficient reason could disqualify her from claiming maintenance.
    Significance: This case recognizes cultural or familial expectations within reason, and if a wife unjustly refuses, she may forfeit maintenance.
     
19. Wife Falsely Accusing Husband of Serious Offenses
    Ground: If the wife has falsely accused her husband of severe offenses (e.g., domestic violence, abuse) and these claims are proven false, her maintenance claim may be denied.
    Case Reference: Mohd. Salim vs. Shamsunnisa, (1998) 1 Crimes 120
    Facts: The wife falsely accused her husband of severe misconduct, but her claims were disproved.
    Judgment: The court held that baseless accusations by a wife against her husband could lead to denial of maintenance.
    Significance: This case underscores that malicious or false allegations against a husband can disqualify a wife from maintenance rights.
     
20. Wife Refusing to Make Efforts for Reconciliation
    Ground: If the wife refuses to participate in attempts to reconcile with her husband, her claim for maintenance may be affected.
    Case Reference: Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah vs. Prabhavati, 1956 SCR 838
    Facts: The wife refused to attend reconciliation meetings arranged by family members.
    Judgment: The Supreme Court observed that a wife who rejects reasonable attempts at reconciliation may lose her right to maintenance.
    Significance: This case demonstrates that a wife must make reasonable efforts to resolve marital disputes to claim maintenance.
     
21. Wife Engaged in Immoral or Illegal Activities
    Ground: A wife involved in immoral or illegal activities may be denied maintenance based on her conduct.
    Case Reference: Kiran Kaur vs. Pritam Singh, (1984) AIR 150
    Facts: The husband argued that his wife was involved in illegal activities, bringing disrepute to the family.
    Judgment: The court held that if a wife is involved in activities considered immoral or illegal, she is disqualified from receiving maintenance.
    Significance: This case highlights that moral conduct is essential for claiming maintenance, and illegal actions may forfeit this right.
     
22. Wife Using Maintenance as Leverage for Unreasonable Demands
    Ground: If the wife demands maintenance with the intent of pressuring the husband into meeting other unreasonable demands, her claim may be denied.
    Case Reference: Seema vs. Gourav, 2016 SCC OnLine P&H 7171
    Facts: The wife sought maintenance while making excessive and unrelated demands from her husband.
    Judgment: The court held that maintenance should not be used as leverage, and dismissed her claim due to the unreasonableness of her demands.
    Significance: This case establishes that maintenance claims should be sincere and not a tool for coercion or manipulation.
     
23. Wife Abandoning Husband and Child Without Just Cause
    Ground: If a wife leaves her husband and child without a valid reason, she may be denied maintenance.
    Case Reference: Shivashankarappa vs. Suresh Bhagavantappa, AIR 1995 Kant 42
    Facts: The wife left her husband and child without any reasonable explanation.
    Judgment: The Karnataka High Court held that abandonment of family without cause disqualifies the wife from claiming maintenance.
    Significance: This case underscores the principle that desertion of familial responsibilities can result in the forfeiture of maintenance rights.
     
24. Wife Refusing to Comply with Court Orders Regarding Marital Property
    Ground: If the wife disobeys court orders related to the marital property (e.g., vacating premises), she may lose her right to maintenance.
    Case Reference: Satish Chander Ahuja vs. Sneha Ahuja, (2020) 11 SCC 129
    Facts: The wife refused to comply with a court order regarding the division of marital property.
    Judgment: The court ruled that non-compliance with orders could affect her maintenance rights, depending on circumstances.
    Significance: This case illustrates that disobedience to court orders, especially regarding marital assets, may impact a wife's right to maintenance.
     
25. Wife's Habitual Drunkenness or Substance Abuse
    Ground: If a wife is habitually involved in drunkenness or substance abuse that disrupts marital harmony, her claim to maintenance may be denied.
    Case Reference: Poonam vs. Mahinder Kumar, (1996) DMC 640
    Facts: The husband alleged that his wife's habitual drinking habits caused severe disruptions in their marital life.
    Judgment: The court found that habitual drunkenness, if proven, can disqualify a wife from maintenance.
    Significance: This case reflects that substance abuse which disrupts marital relations can affect a wife's right to maintenance.
     
26. Wife Has Entered into a Contractual Agreement Waiving Maintenance
    Ground: If the wife has signed an agreement explicitly waiving her right to maintenance, she may be bound by that contract.
    Case Reference: Lalita Toppo vs. State of Jharkhand, (2018) 12 SCC 288
    Facts: The wife had signed an agreement that she would not seek maintenance as part of a mutual separation.
    Judgment: The court observed that a contractual waiver of maintenance is enforceable if both parties have consented to it.
    Significance: This case shows that a legally valid waiver agreement can bar a wife from claiming maintenance.
     
27. Wife Seeking Maintenance After Prolonged Separation
    Ground: If a wife seeks maintenance after a prolonged separation without adequate cause or need, the court may deny it.
    Case Reference: Shamim Bano vs. Asraf Khan, (2014) 12 SCC 636
    Facts: The wife sought maintenance years after separation, during which she had not pursued financial support.
    Judgment: The court held that a long delay in seeking maintenance could be a factor against awarding it, depending on the circumstances.
    Significance: This case highlights that an unexplained delay in claiming maintenance may negatively impact the wife's entitlement.

Written By: Prithwish Ganguli, Advocate, LLM (CU), MA in Criminology & Forensic Sc (NALSAR), MA in Sociology (SRU), Dip in Cyber Law (ASCL), Dip in Psychology (ALISON), Visiting Faculty at Heritage Law College & Heritage Business School