One of the most disturbing aspects that I have been witnessing as a divorce lawyer in the past few months is that even despite impossibly devastating financial conditions still some of the fathers choose not to pay maintenance. In fact, they have conveniently decided to use COVID19 as an excuse for not paying maintenance.
Section 125 in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973
(1) If any person having sufficient means neglects or refuses to maintain-
Let's face facts – as Indians, we all have huge amounts of savings and despite consumerism taking over our lives we still save a lot. No Indian in the middle-class economic stratum and above is becoming bankrupt in 3 months. So why do men at this stage decide not to provide for their child?
In acrimonious divorce battles where orders for maintenance have been passed against the men, they have taken it upon themselves to use this time to square up the battle and exact vengeance. That is because the courts are not really working and it would be extremely difficult and expensive for the wife to move the court at this time. In one matter that I am handling where a politician, Wren *60, who is worth hundreds of crores and is to pay the wife and child combined maintenance of only fifty thousand a month has pleaded penury. Ironically, he is also busy distributing free food to people in his constituency and campaigning for more funds from the government for the poor. Meanwhile, his child-Samantha*, 9 years old, is pleading with her father to pay. He keeps telling her, "You stop staying with Mummy and come back and stay with me and I'll buy you everything".
Which really begs the questions-Will COVID19 change the way court battles are fought? In my opinion, the acrimony will increase rather than decrease and there will be a huge deluge of court cases.
After COVID19 one of the big changes I would like to see in these cases is the immediate implementation of the order so that the child does not suffer. Currently, the implementation takes so long that it defeats the purpose of providing immediate financial relief to the mother and child.
Another change should be a stiffer penalty for non-compliance of the order, which would be a deterrent. In this too, the child would not have to suffer.
Wren has made the classic mistake of punishing the child for what he thinks is the wife's crimes. Since he cannot get to the wife he attacks the child.
If I was his lawyer I would have advised him to pay for the child because after all, you can stop being a husband but never a father and when I hear Samantha telling me, "Daddy doesn't love me" I know that Wren is playing a dangerous game in which he may lose his child.
*Names changed to protect privacy