Man to pay wife maintenance after Jharkhand High Court says mental illness no excuse

4 min readNew DelhiJul 15, 2026 10:00 AM IST

The Jharkhand High Court found that the husband has failed to establish that he is suffering from a mental disorder of such a nature which has made him incapable of earning his livelihood. (AI-generated image)

Observing that a person with mental illness cannot be presumed to be incapable of making decisions or earning a livelihood, the Jharkhand High Court recently refused to interfere with a family court order directing a man to continue paying interim maintenance of Rs 3,000 to his wife.

Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary was hearing a plea filed by a man seeking to quash a family court order passed in August 2025, which rejected his request for exemption from paying maintenance arrears on the ground that he was suffering from a mental illness.

“A person suffering from a mental illness will not be presumed to be incapable of making decisions, and their illness will not be seen as an impairment,” the July 7 order read.

The high court found that the husband has failed to establish that he is suffering from a mental disorder of such a nature which has made him incapable of earning his livelihood or of taking any decision regarding prosecuting his case.

Finding no illegality in the previous order passed by the family court, the high court held that a person suffering from mental illness, which is “mild, moderate or borderline mental retardation”, is capable of living in normal social conditions.

No maintenance paid since July 2024

According to the prosecution, the petitioner had been directed to pay Rs 3,000 per month as interim maintenance to his estranged wife by an order passed in December 2021. However, he allegedly stopped making payments from July 2024 onwards.

Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary held that a person suffering from mental illness, which is “mild, moderate or borderline mental retardation”, is capable of living in normal social conditions.

It was further submitted that the petitioner subsequently moved an application before the family court, arguing that, since he was suffering from a mental ailment, he should not be compelled to pay the arrears of interim maintenance and no adverse order should be passed against him.

Story continues below this ad

The family court, after analysing the previous judgments of the Supreme Court and the Mental Health Care Act, 2017, found that the man merely indicated that the petitioner was diagnosed with some form of mental ailment and his condition improved after certain medication.

The family court held that there was nothing on record to show that the petitioner was unable to earn a livelihood or was mentally incapable of safeguarding his own interests. It therefore concluded that he could not avoid his obligation to pay interim maintenance and rejected his plea.

Aggrieved by the same, the man moved the Jharkhand High Court with this petition.

Arguments

Appearing for the husband, advocate Rahul Pandey argued that the family court has committed an illegality by rejecting the petition even after accepting the fact that the petitioner is suffering from a mental ailment, and the same was done mechanically.

Story continues below this ad

On the contrary, representing the state, additional public prosecutor Manoj Kr Mishra submitted that the documents filed before the family court merely show that the petitioner is suffering from a mental ailment.

He argued that a past or existing mental ailment, by itself, cannot justify non-payment of maintenance unless there is material on record demonstrating that the person is incapable of earning a livelihood or managing his affairs.

Richa Sahay is a Legal Correspondent for The Indian Express, where she focuses on simplifying the complexities of the Indian judicial system. A law postgraduate, she leverages her advanced legal education to bridge the gap between technical court rulings and public understanding, ensuring that readers stay informed about the rapidly evolving legal landscape.

Expertise

Advanced Legal Education: As a law postgraduate, Richa possesses the academic depth required to interpret intricate statutes and constitutional nuances. Her background allows her to provide more than just summaries; she offers context-driven analysis of how legal changes impact the average citizen.

Specialized Beat: She operates at the intersection of law and public policy, focusing on:

Judicial Updates: Providing timely reports on orders from the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts.

Legal Simplification: Translating dense "legalese" into accessible, engaging narratives without sacrificing factual accuracy.

Legislative Changes: Monitoring new bills, amendments, and regulatory shifts that shape Indian society. ... Read More

Tags:

husband

Jharkhand High Court