The Court took strong exception to such submission.
“The tenor of the husband expressed through his counsel shows his attitude and conduct. He is none other than the father of the 11-months-old female child. Such an approach of the husband, who is a public servant, at no circumstances, be encouraged by this court. The respondent, being the father, is responsible for the maintenance of the child. Thus he has to share the maintenance along with the petitioner for the livelihood of the child, which is now with the custody of the petitioner-wife,” it said.
It further stated that it was an established principle that even if a woman was earning and had a source of income, the same will not act as a bar for courts to award her maintenance from her estranged husband.
Source: Barandbench
