Alimony in India Is Not a Lifetime Free Ride: What the Courts Actually Say

This blog busts the popular myth that Indian alimony is a “lifetime free ride” for women. With wit and clarity, it explains what the law actually says. Alimony is gender-neutral. It is based on financial need. It is never automatic. The article draws on real court cases and legal provisions like Section 125 CrPC and the Hindu Marriage Act. It highlights how Indian courts balance fairness with practicality. Far from being a punishment or perpetual payout, alimony is about dignity, not luxury. This is essential reading for those weary of social media myths. It will help them grasp the true picture of divorce settlements in India.

If you’ve spent more than five minutes on social media lately, you’ve probably stumbled upon a meme. It is usually shared by someone very angry in the comments section. This meme claims that “marriage is a lifetime subscription plan for women. Women receive free food, a free house, and free money. Additionally, there is a bonus alimony after divorce.”

Let’s pause right there.

The truth about alimony in India is misunderstood. Half-baked WhatsApp legal advice and kitchen-table gender wars have mangled it thoroughly. Contrary to popular myth, alimony isn’t a blank cheque, nor is it an emotional penalty. It’s a legal provision meant to ensure basic fairness when a marriage ends. It is not a lifetime pass to someone else’s wallet.

So, let’s untangle the mess.

💍 First Things First: What Exactly Is Alimony?

Alimony is also known as “maintenance” in Indian law. It is financial support that one spouse may be ordered to give to the other after separation or divorce. The idea isn’t based on revenge, pity, or gender bias. Its purpose is to ensure that no one is left destitute after years of contributing to a marriage. These contributions can be financial or otherwise.

There are two broad types:

• Interim maintenance: a temporary arrangement during the divorce proceedings.
• Permanent alimony: a one-time payment or monthly allowance after the divorce is finalized.

Both are granted based on need and circumstance, not gender stereotypes.

⚖️ What the Law Actually Says (and Doesn’t Say)

Here’s the fine print most people miss while rage-tweeting:

• Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) allows a person to seek financial support. This includes a woman, child, or even parents who cannot maintain themselves.
• The Hindu Marriage Act (Section 24 and 25) extends this to both husbands and wives. Yes, you read that right — men can claim alimony too.
• Other laws like the Special Marriage Act and Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act have similar provisions. These vary depending on circumstances.

Nowhere do these laws say “a woman automatically gets lifelong financial support just because she was married.”

In fact, the Supreme Court has repeatedly clarified that alimony isn’t a punishment — it’s compensation for genuine financial need, calculated on factors like:

• The earning capacity of both spouses
• Standard of living during the marriage
• Duration of marriage
• Age and health of both parties
• Whether the spouse seeking support can work or already has income

If the woman (or man) is financially independent, the court often reduces or denies alimony altogether.

💰 The Courts Are More Practical Than Twitter Thinks

Over the years, Indian courts have become quite pragmatic about alimony. For example:

• In Kalyan Dey Chowdhury v. Rita Dey Chowdhury (2017), the Supreme Court made a significant ruling. It stated that 25% of the husband’s net income is a reasonable benchmark for maintenance. However, that’s not a universal rule. Each case depends on its facts.
• In Manish Jain v. Akanksha Jain (2017), the court held that alimony is not a “bounty” for the wife to live luxuriously. It is a support mechanism to maintain a standard of living close to what existed in the marriage.
• In several recent cases, courts have denied alimony to women who were educated, employed, or voluntarily chose not to work. Translation: being “capable of earning” counts.

So much for that “lifetime free ride.”

🧾 One-Time Settlements Are Becoming the Norm

Gone are the days when monthly cheques changed hands forever. Many modern couples (and courts) now prefer one-time settlements — a lump sum that severs financial ties cleanly.

This is especially common among working professionals and urban marriages, where both spouses earn. It’s practical, avoids future litigation, and frankly, spares everyone from endless courtroom drama.

In other words, alimony has evolved from a soap opera subplot into a spreadsheet transaction.

🕊️ When Women Pay Alimony

Yes, that happens too — though you won’t find it trending under #JusticeForMen.

In Rani Sethi v. Sunil Sethi (2011), the Delhi court ordered the wife (who had a higher income) to pay maintenance to her husband. The logic was simple: fairness cuts both ways.

It’s still rare. This is partly because fewer women out-earn their spouses in India. But legally, the principle is the same. Gender isn’t the deciding factor; financial disparity is.

💬 So Why the Misunderstanding

Because money, gender, and divorce make for explosive headlines — while balanced legal reasoning does not.

It’s easier to believe that “women always win” or “men always pay.” It is more challenging to read through three different Acts and twenty Supreme Court rulings. Add a sprinkle of resentment, and suddenly alimony becomes a meme war rather than a nuanced discussion.

But here’s the truth: Indian courts aren’t out to bankrupt anyone. They’re trying — sometimes imperfectly — to strike a balance between compassion and practicality.

🌿 The Bottom Line

Alimony isn’t about rewarding one spouse or punishing the other. It’s about preventing destitution and ensuring fairness after a shared life breaks apart.

If both partners are self-sufficient, the court often says, “Great — no money changes hands.”
If one is struggling, the other contributes just enough to help them regain stability.

That’s it. No gold diggers. No lifelong freebies. No legal fairy tales.

So, the next time someone rants online about how “Indian men pay for their exes forever,” feel free to respond with a smile — and perhaps a quote from the Supreme Court:

“The object of alimony is to enable the spouse to live with dignity, not luxury.”

Now that’s a ruling we can all get behind.