Weaponization Of Justice: Misuse Of Personal Laws To Meet Their Needs And The Need For Reform
- IJLLR Journal
- Jul 20
- 2 min read
Debangshu Boral, University of Calcutta
This article seeks to be an informative yet simple analysis of legal provisions and the judicial responses in connection to the maintenance laws of India.
Marriage, once considered a sacred institution, has now turned into a battleground, where the laws that were made with an intention to protect the vulnerable and oppressed wives are being weaponized to perpetrate injustice. The matrimonial laws that were once made with a noble intent have now become a tool of oppression and further create a complex web of provisions that enables forum shopping, frivolous litigation, and systematic harassment. The intent of the article is to analyse and examine how maintenance laws are misused and how the judicial system is responding to such frivolous acts and the attempts made by the various judicial institutions to stop such misuse.
Indian matrimonial law presents a bewildering array of provisions that can be invoked for maintenance claims simultaneously. The primary “weapon" is Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which empowers the Magistrate of the 1st Class to award maintenance in favour of a wife, minor children, and elderly parents. This provision was interpreted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, and further it was held that the term "wife" had a very wide meaning and further clarified the legislative intent. The court observed that the section was designed to prevent vagrancy and destitution, but recent trends suggest that it has now become a tool for extracting money irrespective of genuine needs.
The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, also has Section 24 (interim maintenance during proceedings) and Section 25 (permanent alimony), which enable the wife to claim maintenance. Section 20 of the Domestic Violence Act adds another layer, while Section 18 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, provides yet another avenue. This multiplicity can be termed "judicial arbitrage” which means the ability to shop for the most favourable forum. A litigant can file multiple applications for maintenance claims simultaneously, seeking the same relief from different judicial forums, which results in multiple maintenance orders for identical maintenance obligations.
