A Delhi court has rejected a woman's plea for interim maintenance from her husband after finding that she deliberately concealed her true financial situation and educational background in an apparent attempt to extract money from her estranged spouse.

The Judicial Magistrate First Class (Mahila Court) noted in Friday's ruling: "It prima facie seems that the petitioner has tried to conceal her true financial condition and working and educational experience in order to extort money by way of maintenance from the respondent."

The woman had requested Rs 50,000 monthly maintenance (including Rs 18,000 for rent), claiming in her affidavits that she was an unemployed graduate with no income. Meanwhile, her husband, represented by Advocate Pravesh Dabas, submitted that he earned Rs 55,000 monthly, paid Rs 8,000 in rent, and was responsible for a Rs 35,000 EMI.

The couple, who married in July 2022 and separated in October 2023, are currently undergoing divorce proceedings. During the hearing, the husband successfully demonstrated that his wife had omitted significant details about her qualifications and employment history. He presented evidence including her diploma in computer science and engineering, BEd certificate, and an offer letter from Little Millennium Education Pvt Ltd. The wife later acknowledged having taught at GD Goenka School for one year from September 2022.

Additionally, the husband submitted an income tax return from 2021-2022 showing her income as Rs 1.3 lakhs, further contradicting her claims of financial dependency.

"The Courts are not there to create an army of unemployed educationally qualified women," the court stated, referencing precedents cited by the husband's legal counsel. "The petitioner as per the record brought forth by the respondent seems to be financially sound and capable of making independent source of earning."

When questioned about these inconsistencies, the wife attributed the omissions to "human error," an explanation the court found inadequate. "No reasonable explanation is given throughout the argument as to why the concealments are there in the income affidavit," the court observed.

The court concluded that granting interim maintenance "would amount to giving benefit of her own wrong to the petitioner," noting that the woman "in no way seems to be in the condition of destitution and vagrancy." A separate domestic violence case filed by the woman against her husband remains ongoing.