Rakhi Sadhukhan v. Raja Sadhukhan
“Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Reflecting Pre-Divorce Living Standard”
TL;DR
The Supreme Court enhanced permanent alimony from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 50,000 per month, holding that a divorced wife who remains unmarried is entitled to maintenance reflective of the living standard she enjoyed during marriage, not just bare survival.
The Bottom Line
Maintenance is not for mere survival - a divorced wife deserves dignity and a reasonable standard of living reflecting what she had during the marriage.
Case Timeline
The journey from FIR to Supreme Court verdict
Marriage
Rakhi and Raja married under Special Marriage Act
Marriage
Rakhi and Raja married under Special Marriage Act
Birth of Son
Son born to the couple
Birth of Son
Son born to the couple
Separation
Couple separated after 10 years of marriage
Separation
Couple separated after 10 years of marriage
Divorce Petition Filed
Raja filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty
Divorce Petition Filed
Raja filed for divorce on grounds of cruelty
High Court Decree
Divorce granted with Rs. 20,000/month alimony
High Court Decree
Divorce granted with Rs. 20,000/month alimony
Supreme Court Judgment
Alimony enhanced to Rs. 50,000/month
Supreme Court Judgment
Alimony enhanced to Rs. 50,000/month
The Story
Rakhi Sadhukhan and Raja Sadhukhan married on 18th June 1997 under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. A son was born to them on 5th August 1998. The couple separated in 2007 after about 10 years of marriage.
In July 2008, Raja (the husband) filed a matrimonial suit seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 27 of the Special Marriage Act. The case went through prolonged litigation lasting over a decade.
The High Court, by order dated 25.06.2019, granted a decree of divorce on the ground of mental cruelty and irretrievable breakdown of marriage. It awarded permanent alimony of Rs. 20,000 per month to Rakhi, with a 5% increase every 3 years.
Rakhi challenged this order in the Supreme Court, contending that the amount was grossly inadequate considering her husband's income of Rs. 1.64 lakh per month and the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage. She sought enhancement of the permanent alimony.
Legal Issues
Click each question to reveal the Supreme Court's answer
Arguments
The battle of arguments before the Supreme Court
Petitioner
Vihaan Kumar
Inadequate alimony
Rs. 20,000 per month is grossly inadequate considering the husband earns Rs. 1.64 lakh per month.
Standard of living
Wife is entitled to maintain the standard of living she enjoyed during the marriage.
No independent income
The wife has no independent source of income and is entirely dependent on maintenance.
Respondent
State of Haryana
Other responsibilities
Husband has remarried and has obligations towards second wife and elderly parents.
Reasonable amount already granted
The amount fixed by High Court is reasonable considering all circumstances.
Court's Analysis
How the Court reasoned its decision
The Supreme Court emphasized that maintenance for a divorced wife who remains unmarried is not merely for bare survival but must enable her to live with dignity and maintain a reasonable standard of life. The Court considered the husband's income, inflation, and the wife's lack of independent income.
A divorced wife, who remains unmarried, is entitled to maintenance reflective of the standard of living she enjoyed during her marriage.
Para Para 15
Establishes the principle of maintenance based on pre-divorce living standard.
Maintenance is not merely for bare survival, but must provide a reasonable standard of dignity and security.
Para Para 18
Elevates the purpose of maintenance beyond subsistence.
Although the husband may have other responsibilities—such as supporting a second wife or elderly parents—these obligations do not override his primary duty to provide for his divorced spouse, particularly when she remains financially dependent.
Para Para 22
Establishes priority of maintenance to first wife.
The Verdict
Relief Granted
Wife's permanent alimony enhanced to Rs. 50,000 per month with periodic increases.
Directions Issued
- Permanent alimony enhanced from Rs. 20,000 to Rs. 50,000 per month
- Alimony to increase by 5% every 2 years (instead of 3 years)
- No maintenance for adult son who is gainfully employed
- Husband's other obligations do not override duty to divorced wife
Key Legal Principles Established
Divorced wife entitled to maintenance reflecting pre-divorce living standard
Maintenance is for dignity, not mere survival
Husband's income and wife's lack of income are key factors
Other obligations do not override maintenance duty to first wife
Adult employed children do not require maintenance from father
Periodic increases should account for inflation
Key Takeaways
What different people should know from this case
- If you are divorced and not remarried, you deserve maintenance that allows you to live with dignity
- Alimony is not just for survival - it should reflect the lifestyle you had during marriage
- Your ex-husband cannot use his second marriage as an excuse to reduce your maintenance
- Courts will increase alimony periodically to account for rising costs
Legal Framework
Applicable laws and provisions
Statutory Provisions
Section 37
Special Marriage Act, 1954
“Any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the purpose, order that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff for her maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical payment for a term not exceeding the life of the plaintiff as, having regard to the defendant's own income and other property, if any, the income and other property of the plaintiff, the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case, it may seem to the court to be just.”
Relevance: Governs permanent alimony under Special Marriage Act.
Section 125
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
“Provides for maintenance of wives, children, and parents.”
Relevance: General maintenance provision applicable across religions.
Related Cases & Precedents
Shilpa Sailesh v. Varun Sreenivasan
cited(2023) 5 SCC 1
On permanent alimony principles in divorce cases.
Kiran Jyot Maini v. Anish Pramod Patel
cited2024 INSC
On principles of permanent alimony determination.
Watch & Learn
Video explanations in multiple languages
Frequently Asked Questions
Explore Related Cases
More case summaries on similar legal topics
Urmila Dixit v. Sunil Sharan Dixit
2025 INSC 20
When Children Fail Their Parents, the Law Steps In to Protect Senior Citizens
Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun
2023 INSC 783
The Landmark Ruling on Property Rights of Children from Void Marriages
Surya Vadanan v. State of Tamil Nadu
(2015) 5 SCC 450
When Borders Cannot Shield a Parent Who Flees with Children
Bhuwan Mohan Singh v. Meena
(2015) 6 SCC 353
Justice Delayed is Justice Denied - The Call for Swift Maintenance Orders
DISCLAIMER: This case summary is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice. For advice on your specific situation, please consult a qualified advocate. JurisOptima is not responsible for any actions taken based on this information.
Facing aSimilar Situation?
Our advocates can help you understand how this judgment applies to your case.